DS winning War

[neotokeo2001]

New data released by Media Create has revealed that the Nintendo DS sold 1,852,000 units since release in Japan.

For comparison, Total sales of the PSP were lower by about 800,000 units, at 1,068,000 units. (To the disappointment of fanboys, this does not mean that the DS is "owning" the PSP in Japan – remember, the DS has been on the market longer.)

Here are the hardware sales in Japan for the week of April 18 - 24.

1. Nintendo DS - 96,191 units
2. PlayStation 2 - 33,080 units
3. PlayStation Portable - 33,004 units
4. GameBoy Advance SP - 10,820 units
5. GameCube - 8,329 units
6. GameBoy Advance - 422 units
7. Xbox - 112 units

Nintendo has shipped well over 5 million DS handheld consoles around the globe.

The five-million mark was actually passed mid-March, the company said, just after the console's UK launch, during which it became the fastest-selling console in UK videogaming history. After an initial two-day rush yielded 87,000 sales, Nintendo went on to ship 200,000 DS handhelds in the UK.

Nintendo said it was "on track" to meet its target and ship 5-6 million DS consoles during its current fiscal year, which ends 31 March 2006.

By contrast, Sony is believed to have shipped over 2.5 million PlayStation Portables so far, 2.46 million in Q1 2005 alone.

Here are the Top 10 Best Selling Games in Japan for the week of April 18 - 24.

1. Romancing SaGa: Minstrel Song (PS2, Square Enix) - 217,000 units
2. Fire Emblem: Souen no Kiseki (GC, Nintendo) - 102,000 units
3. Naruto: Saikyo Ninja Daikesshu 3 for DS (NDS, Tomy) - 84,000 units
4. Nintendogs: Shiba and friends (NDS, Nintendo) - 83,000 units
5. Nintendogs: Dachs and friends (NDS, Nintendo) - 53,000 units
6. Nintendogs: Chihuahua and friends (NDS, Nintendo) - 46,000 units
7. Baseball Live 2005 (PS2, Namco) - 44,000 units
8. Rockman Zero 4 (GBA, Capcom) - 38,000 units
9. Mobilt Suit Gundam: The One Year War (PS2, Bandai) - 30,000 (234,000) units
10. Shutokou Battle: Zone of Control (PSP, Genki) - 29,000 units

Nintendogs looks like the next Pokemon. Wait untill it hits the US and Europe.

Numbers compiled from several locations.

[Kejoriv]

Its more amazing how many PS2 units are still selling

PlayStation 2 - 33,080 units !!! @_@

[Gamemaster_ca_2003]

Man that the Lowest Number of XBOX Units sold in Japan That I have seen.

[Graham Mitchell]

I'm not sure of the statistics here because we're working with huge numbers, but...could any system that ships 5 million units worldwide really be considered a failure?

[PDorr3]

Man that the Lowest Number of XBOX Units sold in Japan That I have seen.

Doesnt it make you wonder about sales statistics of such systems as 32x, Jaguar, etc, especialy in the US?

It is still way too early to say which handheld is winning the war, but just based on the PSP's success in the US, I would say PSP might just beat out the DS this holiday season, eventhough the DS has some very strong franchises coming out later this year...

[smork]

For comparison, Total sales of the PSP were lower by about 800,000 units, at 1,068,000 units. (To the disappointment of fanboys, this does not mean that the DS is "owning" the PSP in Japan – remember, the DS has been on the market longer.)

I thought the DS had a December 2 release date and the PSP a December 12 date -- about the same. I think that the Japanese market will tolerate quirky products a little more than the US market, which probably explains the discrepancy. I'm sure if Nintendo can actually get some software released instead of it's fairly meager offerings as of now that both systems will continue to sell well.

[anagrama]

"There are lies, there are damned lies and then there are statistics"

[slownerveaction]

I thought the DS had a December 2 release date and the PSP a December 12 date -- about the same.

Yeah, but the PSP was available in relatively limited quantities (compared to the DS) in December. When Sony pumped up production in January, the PSP outsold the DS for a while. Then they were pretty even more recently, and now this is the first week either system has had real sales advantage in Japan.

I've gotta say this is the most interesting "console war" in a while. (Even though whether or not they're in "competition" seems to depend on the mood of the PR guys.) I'm really excited to see what the real "second wave" of games for both systems will be like.

[petewhitley]

Here are the hardware sales in Japan for the week of April 18 - 24.

1. Nintendo DS - 96,191 units
2. PlayStation 2 - 33,080 units
3. PlayStation Portable - 33,004 units
4. GameBoy Advance SP - 10,820 units
5. GameCube - 8,329 units
6. GameBoy Advance - 422 units
7. Xbox - 112 units

These numbers and this week are an anomaly, as April 21st saw the release of the highly sought after Turquoise Blue and Candy Pink versions of the DS. This is also just a couple of weeks after the launch of the Graphite Black and Pure White versions. For the year to date, the PSP has outsold the DS in Japan.

[hydr0x]

[quote=neotokeo2001] For the year to date, the PSP has outsold the DS in Japan.

yeah it has, with a speed that if it remains like that means it will be even with the DS 45 weeks from now..... enough said

[syd]

But is the PSP so much better than the DS as to warrant spending an extra $100-$150? I'm interested in whats going to happen when Nintendo comes out with their new Gameboy hand held.

[hydr0x]

But is the PSP so much better than the DS as to warrant spending an extra $100-$150? I'm interested in whats going to happen when Nintendo comes out with their new Gameboy hand held.

please, do not start another "which one is better" discussion, this thread was just about analyzing (or not) the sales numbers from Japan, nothing else

[GarrettCRW]

yeah it has, with a speed that if it remains like that means it will be even with the DS 45 weeks from now..... enough said

A lot can change in a year.

[Captain Wrong]

Which war is the DS winning? The Iraq war? The war on drugs? The war of the worlds?

[Nesmaster]

Which war is the DS winning? The Iraq war? The war on drugs? The war of the worlds?

LOL :P :D

[goatdan]

I'm not sure of the statistics here because we're working with huge numbers, but...could any system that ships 5 million units worldwide really be considered a failure?

In a word, no.

In today's world though, where people on these boards especially want to declare their favorite system the winner, even if they both sell around 20 million units -- or about the same as the VCS if memory serves -- then the one that sells less is a "failure."

Back when the VCS was out and the Intellivision sold something like 2 million units, it was heralded as a great success and made Mattel TONS of money. The DS though, for some reason seems to be looked at as a distant second place for some reason, even though history proves quite otherwise. We're just in a different market. Game systems are marketed a lot different now, and a LOT more people are buying them.

Like I've said for a while, because of the sheer quantity of game systems being sold, there is room in the market for three consoles right now. Microsoft is voluntarily losing money on their console, while Nintendo is raking in the dough.



I thought the DS had a December 2 release date and the PSP a December 12 date -- about the same.

Yeah, but the PSP was available in relatively limited quantities (compared to the DS) in December. When Sony pumped up production in January, the PSP outsold the DS for a while. Then they were pretty even more recently, and now this is the first week either system has had real sales advantage in Japan.

The thing that I keep thinking about whenever I hear that they can't be compared is that Sony couldn't produce them quickly enough is that Nintendo opened a third production plant to get more DS consoles made to meet the demand. Sony went on the "make it impossible to find, people will want it more" principal that they have gone on with all of their hardware. The fact is that Sony could've ramped up production at any time.

They didn't, so the numbers in Japan can be directly compared as they are.


These numbers and this week are an anomaly, as April 21st saw the release of the highly sought after Turquoise Blue and Candy Pink versions of the DS. This is also just a couple of weeks after the launch of the Graphite Black and Pure White versions. For the year to date, the PSP has outsold the DS in Japan.

Yes. In fact, at this point the trend is that this past week with the DS in the lead was a fluke. The PSP has been steadily gaining ground on the DS in Japan. I agree with you here.


yeah it has, with a speed that if it remains like that means it will be even with the DS 45 weeks from now..... enough said

Of course, this is the point that needs to be taken into consideration. 45 weeks seems a long time, but it is less than a year. On the other hand, it seems that when I last looked at these numbers in detail, it was just around that number or a little higher. The PSP is steadily gaining, but hasn't seemed to have any huge gains... at least, not yet.

If the DS continues to roll out hits like Nintendogs and other things for the Japanese market, it could stay on top for a much longer time.

By the way, I feel that the spike in DS sales can probably be more attributed to the release of Nintendogs than the different color schemes, as I don't think too many consumers are holding off purchasing a system until the "new color" comes out. Nintendogs is a major release, especially because it appeals to a whole new set of gamers than the ones that have probably picked up the DS so far. It seems to be a LOT more "casual."

It sure hasn't worked for the GameCube...

[neotokeo2001]

I have no clear favorite between the PSP or the DS. But, With Sony releasing the PSP in the forced anti-value pack and the high price point, I don't want them to do well. Sony has also used the media to hype the release into something that it wasn't. From day 1 you could walk into a store and buy a PSP, there was no shortage or mass sell-out.

Nintendo on the other hand has dragged their feet on new releases, Maybe because of the New Gameboy Advance??

I hope both companies have some surprises at E3.

And the War that is being waged is for a billion doller stake in the collective pockets of the world.

[Nature Boy]

Which war is the DS winning? The Iraq war? The war on drugs? The war of the worlds?

War of the Roses? :)

[machine.slave]

Its more amazing how many PS2 units are still selling

That's because people keep having to replace their broken ones :roll: (the scary party is, it's probably true)

What I really want to know is... when the $#%@ are we going to see some of those DS and PSP games over here?!?!

[Tatsu]

Its more amazing how many PS2 units are still selling

That's because people keep having to replace their broken ones :roll: (the scary party is, it's probably true)

What I really want to know is... when the $#%@ are we going to see some of those DS and PSP games over here?!?!

Or as speaking as a European: When the fuck will we see the PSP handheld over here?!

[calthaer]

I don't care who wins or loses - I just want the next Pokemon game, and it better have Celebi in it.

[sharp]

Its more amazing how many PS2 units are still selling

That's because people keep having to replace their broken ones :roll: (the scary party is, it's probably true)

What I really want to know is... when the $#%@ are we going to see some of those DS and PSP games over here?!?!

Or as speaking as a European: When the fuck will we see the PSP handheld over here?!

1st September

About the discussion. I don't care which one sells better, as long as I get good games I'm happy.

[Avatard]

Yea what war? Do the companies really give a flip about numbers sold, or pure profiet? Which one is making more profiet from their hardware? Or are they shooting for longterm like the XBox did, eat loss on each console to get them out there and recouperate money loss on game sales. You really can't look at 2-3 buisness models and pick one data stat and say "this company is winning".

[goatdan]

Yea what war? Do the companies really give a flip about numbers sold, or pure profiet? Which one is making more profiet from their hardware? Or are they shooting for longterm like the XBox did, eat loss on each console to get them out there and recouperate money loss on game sales. You really can't look at 2-3 buisness models and pick one data stat and say "this company is winning".

By pure numbers sold, yes you can. And the bigger point is that the battle that is going on is over market share, not profitability. I would assume both Nintendo and Sony are raking in the cash based on their machines, but the "winner" will be the one whose market share is biggest. If one can establish itself as dominant -- which I doubt will happen considering the pure number of consoles moved so far -- then that one can make even more money and will get a higher percentage of game development.

In home consoles, Microsoft is so intensly wanting to gain market share that they are practically giving away the system, yet that's okay because they want to gain market share. Even Nintendo, through pricing and things like that, wants to gain market share for the GameCube even though it isn't selling as many. More market share = more money.

[Avatard]

Yea, thats why I mentioned about xbox eating losses to get market share. But still....if you look at the numbers Sony can sell less systems and still make the same net profit cause their games tend to be more expensive. But I would agree that numbers sold would be the best target to shoot for. That would have been the PERFECT opportunity for Nintendo, just take their self proclaimed 3rd pillar platform and slap it on the market for $40, then see how many more games they would sale because of the huge market share of platforms.

Whatever happens though, if you're making money and your stock prices aren't dropping then you're winning as far as I'm concerned.

[slownerveaction]

The thing that I keep thinking about whenever I hear that they can't be compared is that Sony couldn't produce them quickly enough is that Nintendo opened a third production plant to get more DS consoles made to meet the demand. Sony went on the "make it impossible to find, people will want it more" principal that they have gone on with all of their hardware. The fact is that Sony could've ramped up production at any time.

They didn't, so the numbers in Japan can be directly compared as they are.

I definitely agree that Sony could have upped production... but they didn't until January. And when they did, hardware sales got a substantial boost, so the demand was out there. I just wanted to point out that, while the systems' Japanese launches were close together, there were different approaches taken by each company. Nintedndo adaquetely supplied the market (a smart move, in my opinion), whereas Sony started out with limited quantities and ramped up production.


If the DS continues to roll out hits like Nintendogs and other things for the Japanese market, it could stay on top for a much longer time.

Animal Crossing (well, Animal Forest in Japan) should be big. A "real" Pokemon game would do wonders (although maybe not with the older demographic Nintendo wants most). Jump Superstars could also do quite well in the Japanese market. Sony definitely doesn't have anything first-party that could rival the sales potential of those games in Japan. Third-party stuff (like the FFVII spin-off games Squeenix is cookin' up) is another story.


Yea what war? Do the companies really give a flip about numbers sold, or pure profiet? Which one is making more profiet from their hardware? Or are they shooting for longterm like the XBox did, eat loss on each console to get them out there and recouperate money loss on game sales. You really can't look at 2-3 buisness models and pick one data stat and say "this company is winning".

I think it's ultimately all about "mindshare." Whichever company captures the hearts of gamers is ultimately the one that'll be in the best position. If Game Boy is replaced by PSP as the generic term for a portable (if you don't believe me, look at how many people -- and even respected magazines like Rolling Stone -- have referred to the DS as the "new Game Boy"), Nintendo is in trouble.

[Avatard]

Just a disclaimer for showneveraction. He calls it as he sees it (opinion). Just wanted to head off all the "nuh uhh, PSP game sales are gonna ownz!".

Anyhow, don't fool yourself thinking Nintendo and Sony really care, as corporations, about mindshare. A corporation is a legal entity built to make money. If they are not making money they collapse. Losing mindshare means losing money though, so in the intrest of money they want to keep "mindshare". The goal is staying alive and making money. Thats the real war, staying alive. That takes large net profits to win however that is achieved. Who cares how many consoles each sold if its not the only thing to consider in figuring profit. It is only one piece of the puzzle, a large piece granted, but only one.

[NintendoMan]

Its more amazing how many PS2 units are still selling

PlayStation 2 - 33,080 units !!! @_@

I was thinkng the EXACT same thing!

It's amazing how the PS2 is still selling that much!
Also, how low total # of XBOX's sold!

[slownerveaction]

Just a disclaimer for showneveraction. He calls it as he sees it (opinion). Just wanted to head off all the "nuh uhh, PSP game sales are gonna ownz!".

No need to put up a disclaimer for me.

My analysis is based on the way the Japanese gaming market is going. There are very few games selling there at the moment, and I don't see much on the immediate horizon for the PSP that has potential to be a major hit there. Granted, Animal Crossing DS doesn't even have a release date, Jump Superstars won't be out for months, and a full Pokemon RPG has only been announced.

On the other hand... the PSP game sales are ownz-ing in America. The attach rate after the first month is in line with what the current consoles had. That's a good sign for healthy software sales.


Anyhow, don't fool yourself thinking Nintendo and Sony really care, as corporations, about mindshare. A corporation is a legal entity built to make money. If they are not making money they collapse. Losing mindshare means losing money though, so in the intrest of money they want to keep "mindshare". The goal is staying alive and making money. Thats the real war, staying alive. That takes large net profits to win however that is achieved. Who cares how many consoles each sold if its not the only thing to consider in figuring profit. It is only one piece of the puzzle, a large piece granted, but only one.

I know that the bottom line is profit. But in the tech industry, the importance mindshare/the Zeitgeist/the "cool factor" can not be understated! Think about the iPod, or to a lesser extent the TiVo: There are competing products on the market for both that do the same thing, but the branding is so powerful that they've practically become verbs. People say they're "gonna TiVo" a show or "listen to this Podcast." If either the DS or PSP reach that level of cultural ubiquity, it'll be very hard for a competitor to displace them from the marketplace. And that = profit!

[Avatard]

Yea, I'm probably one of the minority then. I prefer my old CD medium MP3 capable player over an iPod for versitility in more situations. I prefer to not watch TV as much as possible. And I prefer Nintendo's game selection to Sony's any day.

But yea, I see the mindshare issues. I can NOT call my DS a Nintendo DS, its always Gameboy DS. I don't think its possible. When people ask "Whats a Nintendo DS" I say "its the new Gameboy". Then they know what I'm talking about, hehe.

[slownerveaction]

I prefer to not watch TV as much as possible.

You aren't alone on that one. :)

[goatdan]

I definitely agree that Sony could have upped production... but they didn't until January. And when they did, hardware sales got a substantial boost, so the demand was out there. I just wanted to point out that, while the systems' Japanese launches were close together, there were different approaches taken by each company. Nintedndo adaquetely supplied the market (a smart move, in my opinion), whereas Sony started out with limited quantities and ramped up production.

Exactly. But just because they took different approaches doesn't mean that we can't compare their numbers. Sony took an approach that gave them less hardware in the market immediately, and because of either that approach or the fact that the Japanese consumers just didn't care about it as much. Currently, the PSP is 45 weeks of sales behind "catching up" with the DS. That is a significant amount, and while it isn't overcomable, hearing people state that "Sony couldn't manufacture enough hardware to keep up with demand" is crap, and it really just boils down to what they wanted to supply the market with.

I'd agree. Coming out with as many DS consoles as possible was a very smart move.


Animal Crossing (well, Animal Forest in Japan) should be big. A "real" Pokemon game would do wonders (although maybe not with the older demographic Nintendo wants most). Jump Superstars could also do quite well in the Japanese market. Sony definitely doesn't have anything first-party that could rival the sales potential of those games in Japan. Third-party stuff (like the FFVII spin-off games Squeenix is cookin' up) is another story.

I agree. If they can get Animal Crossing out as soon as possible, they are going to have a big advantage in the way of games that the Japanese market seems to really love. The problem with the PSP in the Japanese market right now is that so far, the games have more of a US-style to most of them. Once the Squarenix games start coming out though... watch out.

[Captain Wrong]

Which war is the DS winning? The Iraq war? The war on drugs? The war of the worlds?

War of the Roses? :)

I'm beginning to think it's the war of the most long winded supporters. ;)

[slownerveaction]

Exactly. But just because they took different approaches doesn't mean that we can't compare their numbers. Sony took an approach that gave them less hardware in the market immediately, and because of either that approach or the fact that the Japanese consumers just didn't care about it as much. Currently, the PSP is 45 weeks of sales behind "catching up" with the DS. That is a significant amount, and while it isn't overcomable, hearing people state that "Sony couldn't manufacture enough hardware to keep up with demand" is crap, and it really just boils down to what they wanted to supply the market with.

I'd agree. Coming out with as many DS consoles as possible was a very smart move.

Yes, I'm not arguing that. BTW, how did we arrive at the 45 week number? That might be a bit optimistic for Sony: The week preceding this one had the PSP outselling the DS by a mere 7252 units. If it were to outpace the DS on average by 10,000 units a week, it would take almost 80 weeks to make up the difference. Not an insurmountable difference(the Saturn had a similar advantage over the PS in Japan early on), but not a trivial one either.


The problem with the PSP in the Japanese market right now is that so far, the games have more of a US-style to most of them. Once the Squarenix games start coming out though... watch out.

Yep. The PSP has a library aimed right at the American consumer, and I feel that the DS could be in real trouble here in a couple months if Nintendo doesn't step up with some solid releases and advertising.

This is a good thread. Lots of good discussion, no fanboyism ruining it. :)

[Avatard]

Oh, its comming. I bought my DS knowing that the games I wanted would be comming out almost a year later. As of now I only own one game.

[Griking]

Just a disclaimer for showneveraction. He calls it as he sees it (opinion). Just wanted to head off all the "nuh uhh, PSP game sales are gonna ownz!".

No need to put up a disclaimer for me.

My analysis is based on the way the Japanese gaming market is going. There are very few games selling there at the moment, and I don't see much on the immediate horizon for the PSP that has potential to be a major hit there. Granted, Animal Crossing DS doesn't even have a release date, Jump Superstars won't be out for months, and a full Pokemon RPG has only been announced.

On the other hand... the PSP game sales are ownz-ing in America. The attach rate after the first month is in line with what the current consoles had. That's a good sign for healthy software sales.


Anyhow, don't fool yourself thinking Nintendo and Sony really care, as corporations, about mindshare. A corporation is a legal entity built to make money. If they are not making money they collapse. Losing mindshare means losing money though, so in the intrest of money they want to keep "mindshare". The goal is staying alive and making money. Thats the real war, staying alive. That takes large net profits to win however that is achieved. Who cares how many consoles each sold if its not the only thing to consider in figuring profit. It is only one piece of the puzzle, a large piece granted, but only one.

I know that the bottom line is profit. But in the tech industry, the importance mindshare/the Zeitgeist/the "cool factor" can not be understated! Think about the iPod, or to a lesser extent the TiVo: There are competing products on the market for both that do the same thing, but the branding is so powerful that they've practically become verbs. People say they're "gonna TiVo" a show or "listen to this Podcast." If either the DS or PSP reach that level of cultural ubiquity, it'll be very hard for a competitor to displace them from the marketplace. And that = profit!

I'm sure that 3rd party game development has a lot to do with how many consoles are sold. Developers don't want to make a port for a console that doesn't sell well enough. See the Gamecube for an example of this.

[Cthulhu]

I think the DS will stay on top for a few more months, but the PSP will probably win out in the end. The launch of the PSP was rushed to get it out the door, and as a result there aren't many impressive games for it. 90% of the stuff coming out right now is still junk. Eventually, however, that will change. The DS is not a "weak" system, and I think it will remain a real force in the market, but the PSP in unquestionably a more powerful system. Good graphics might not be the most important thing to you, but they are the thing that sells a game to the average person. And it's average people that purchase the majority of games. All of this is my personal guess of course. LOL

[zmweasel]

I think the DS will stay on top for a few more months, but the PSP will probably win out in the end. The launch of the PSP was rushed to get it out the door, and as a result there aren't many impressive games for it. 90% of the stuff coming out right now is still junk. Eventually, however, that will change. The DS is not a "weak" system, and I think it will remain a real force in the market, but the PSP in unquestionably a more powerful system. Good graphics might not be the most important thing to you, but they are the thing that sells a game to the average person. And it's average people that purchase the majority of games. All of this is my personal guess of course. LOL

It was 22 months from the PSP's unveiling in May 2003 to its North American launch in March 2005. Nearly 20 games were available at launch. That's not "rushed to get it out the door."

It was 10 months from the DS's unveiling in January 2004 to its North American launch in November 2004, with a massive cosmetic revamp shortly after E3 in May 2004. Barely half a dozen games were available at launch. THAT is a rushed hardware launch.

As for the "90%...junk," are you referring to the PSP library, the DS library, or both?

-- Z.

[Graham Mitchell]

I think the DS will stay on top for a few more months, but the PSP will probably win out in the end. The launch of the PSP was rushed to get it out the door, and as a result there aren't many impressive games for it. 90% of the stuff coming out right now is still junk. Eventually, however, that will change. The DS is not a "weak" system, and I think it will remain a real force in the market, but the PSP in unquestionably a more powerful system. Good graphics might not be the most important thing to you, but they are the thing that sells a game to the average person. And it's average people that purchase the majority of games. All of this is my personal guess of course. LOL

You're probably right. Isn't it funny how that always works out? I think Sony had the right idea (from a financial standpoint) when their strategy became just flooding the market with titles. I remember when Playstation launched, about 3/4 of the titles that came in to the store where I worked during PSX's first 6 months were garbage. But before long, the PSX had as many games on the shelf ast the SNES, and in way less time. And some PSX game was always selling.

[slownerveaction]

I'm sure that 3rd party game development has a lot to do with how many consoles are sold. Developers don't want to make a port for a console that doesn't sell well enough. See the Gamecube for an example of this.

Install base is important obviously, but it don't mean jack if people aren't buying the games.

The GameCube is an interesting example of this. It isn't that it has the smallest install base (although it does now, at least in North America); it's just that third-party games haven't sold as well on it. Sure, there are a few exceptions, like the Sonics, Soul Calibur 2, Super Monkey Ball, Viewtiful Joe, and RE4, but other third-party stuff (particularly multi-platform releases) has done quite poorly.

Take a look at the multi-platform sales from EA, a company that has supported the GameCube quite well:

http://forums.gaming-age.com/showthread.php?t=43921

Here's another, more telling, thread from Gaming Age with Dec. 2004 numbers:

http://forums.gaming-age.com/showthread.php?t=31549

You have to dig through multiple pages to get all the good info, so I'll summerize:


HARDWARE SALES DECEMBER 2004
Updated numbers
Xbox = 1,044,000
PS2 = 989,000
Gamecube = 814,000

Xbox got an usually large bump in Dec because of Halo 2 (usually the PS2 is on top), but check out the GC numbers. They really aren't that bad.

And the GC's top ten for the month:


TOP 50 GCN
1 GCN MARIO PARTY 6 W/MIC 469,014
2 GCN METROID PRIME 2: ECHO 270,092
3 GCN PAPER MARIO: THOUSAND 214,921
4 GCN MARIO POWER TENNIS 198,793
5 GCN THE SPONGEBOB MOVIE 193,650
6 GCN THE INCREDIBLES 169,537
7 GCN NEED SPEED:UNDRGRND 2 158,473
8 GCN SUPER SMASH BRO MELEE 152,962
9 GCN SUPER MARIO SUNSHINE 146,104
10 GCN MADDEN NFL 2005 143,677

Yikes! The GC had some half-way decent numbers on the Spongebob and Incredibles games, but NFSU 2 and Madden are really weak compared to the Xbox and PS2 numbers. In general, GC sales are way below the PS2 and Xbox's.

Another third-party example from that month, Prince of Persia 2:


19 PS2 PRINCE PERSIA:WARRIOR 236,096
7 XBX PRINCE PERSIA:WARRIOR 224,831
31 GCN PRINCE PERSIA:WARRIOR 66,570

If you were to compare those numbers for the install bases of the systems, it wouldn't match up. It would be the PS2 way ahead, then the Xbox and GC relatively close together behind. So install base isn't everything for third-party support -- it doesn't matter how many systems are out there if no one is buying games for the system. The DS and PSP could be neck and neck as far as install base is concerned, but third-party games could sell like hotcakes on one system yet bomb on the other. Attach rate (how many games each owner of a system buys) is far better metric for potential third-party support.

[XxMe2NiKxX]

In referrance to the original post, these numbers don't mean anything right now. Both consoles are undeniably weak in the software market, particularilly the DS, but both consoles will be hitting their peak at Fall '05, and until then, the numbers mean poo.

[zmweasel]

In referrance to the original post, these numbers don't mean anything right now. Both consoles are undeniably weak in the software market, particularilly the DS, but both consoles will be hitting their peak at Fall '05, and until then, the numbers mean poo.

You're willing to discount the first nine months of DS sales and the first six months of PSP sales (in North America) as "poo"? The GameCube's first price drop occurred just six months after it launched, when it was clearly getting pounded by the PS2 and Xbox; ask Nintendo if it considered that period of time to be irrelevant.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

Yes, I'm not arguing that. BTW, how did we arrive at the 45 week number? That might be a bit optimistic for Sony: The week preceding this one had the PSP outselling the DS by a mere 7252 units. If it were to outpace the DS on average by 10,000 units a week, it would take almost 80 weeks to make up the difference. Not an insurmountable difference(the Saturn had a similar advantage over the PS in Japan early on), but not a trivial one either.

Someone else in this thread did, actually (SoulBlazer, I think?) and I just believe it :). I did a big comparative study back in late Jan / early Feb of the time it would take, and that seemed to be about the average time, so the 45 week period seems like it should be right. Again, definitely not an insurmountable time... but the DS definitely has the advantage right now.


Yep. The PSP has a library aimed right at the American consumer, and I feel that the DS could be in real trouble here in a couple months if Nintendo doesn't step up with some solid releases and advertising.

This is a good thread. Lots of good discussion, no fanboyism ruining it. :)

Agreed! Great thread so far. Let's keep this conversation up :)

[nate1749]

It should also be considered that just because you're selling units doesn't mean you're making money. From a financial perspective Xbox has been completely dissapointing, but the CFO assured share holders last January that XBOX 2 will be a profitable system. I always laugh when I read comments about how Microsoft has made millions or even billions off of XBox, when it's really done anything but. Most people don't realize that they took a loss on every unit sold.

So although it's interesting to compare how many PSP versus DS units sold, it's really like comparing horsepower in a pickup truck (400hp) to a car (200hp) and saying the truck would win a race. There are just so many other variables involved that it's trivial (although still interesting).

Nate

[Ed Oscuro]

I always laugh when I read comments about how Microsoft has made millions or even billions off of XBox, when it's really done anything but. Most people don't realize that they took a loss on every unit sold.
Interesting...just did some looking and John Connors reported in late January that the home entertainment division (which includes the XBox) posted a profit; he said on Mar. 10th that he expects the system to be profitable in the next generation with the advances they can make. (And, for what it's worth, Spong.com says XBox units aren't being made anymore to clear store shelves for the new units.)

[goatdan]

It should also be considered that just because you're selling units doesn't mean you're making money. From a financial perspective Xbox has been completely dissapointing, but the CFO assured share holders last January that XBOX 2 will be a profitable system. I always laugh when I read comments about how Microsoft has made millions or even billions off of XBox, when it's really done anything but. Most people don't realize that they took a loss on every unit sold.

The shareholders do though, as Bill Gates outlined his plan for the Xbox from the beginning as a way to get a multi-function box into consumer's hands and start getting them used to paying extra for the "features" that went along with it such as DVD and Microsoft Live. The big goal was that if they could get them used to using a Microsoft unit for these things, eventually, they could morph it into a full consumable of some type and make it so that if people want to download movies, they could -- but it would be a bit of an extra cost. If people want to record TV, they could -- but it would be a bit of an extra cost.

It could be genius. So far, the Xbox model is working for what it was intended too -- getting into people's homes and selling their features strongly. The Xbox 2 is where Microsoft hopes to up the number of features that you can pay to unlock, and hopes to find the market to do just that.

Maybe the actual game system itself will only cost $200.00, but to unlock it to it's potential, it will be another $300.00 that will essentially be pure profit to Microsoft. It's a genius plan. Whether it works or not...


So although it's interesting to compare how many PSP versus DS units sold, it's really like comparing horsepower in a pickup truck (400hp) to a car (200hp) and saying the truck would win a race. There are just so many other variables involved that it's trivial (although still interesting).

Yes, except that unlike comparing cars and trucks (or apples and oranges) this is more like comparing two cars in of the same type (or Granny Smith apples and Red Delicious apples). They are both essentially game systems (and, as I'm known for saying, this could change if Nintendo ever released the Palm OS for the DS, which I think if there is no mention of at E3 is a dead deal), and -- at least for the moment -- it is fair to make comparisons about them.

Even with a different marketing plan, you can compare the Xbox to the GameCube because the Xbox and GameCube set out to do the same thing -- win as much of the market share as possible. That isn't to say that they are very similar in many ways at all -- the GameCube has no online option and is mostly geared toward a younger audience (yes, it's true) while the Xbox has the most complete online system out there, and it therefore geared more toward older audiences. The goal of selling as many consoles remains the same though.

And slownerveaction, the comparison of software sold for the GameCube is a really important point. To unglorify Nintendo's December sales a little further (sorry fans) the reason the GameCube did as well as it did during that time was for two reasons: the fact the PS2 and Xbox were impossible to find, with most stores not actually getting in-store stock of either system until February, and the fact that the GameCube came packed in with two controllers and Mario Kart: Double Dash -- a HUGE amount of giveaway compared to the PS2 and Xbox.

And this is the exact problem that the GameCube has right now -- the games that sell well on it are Nintendo games. Third party developers really look to the Xbox and PS2 to sell higher quantities of games that are less cartoony, and Prince of Persia is perhaps the best example of that. Another thing - the only reason Madden was even in the top 10 has to do with the fact that NFL 2K5 didn't come out for that system. The NFL is a HUGE property, as we all know, and putting all the NFL sales in one game, it still didn't do very well at all.

The GameCube is in trouble for reasons that have nothing to do with the sales of hardware, and it is something that Nintendo has to find a way to fix with the next generation if they want to continue to actually compete in the market.

[slownerveaction]

Someone else in this thread did, actually (SoulBlazer, I think?) and I just believe it :). I did a big comparative study back in late Jan / early Feb of the time it would take, and that seemed to be about the average time, so the 45 week period seems like it should be right. Again, definitely not an insurmountable time... but the DS definitely has the advantage right now.

Yeah, I checked back and it was hydr0x that said it, but there weren't any real figures given. (BTW, do you have a link back to the comparative study you did?) For what it's worth, I think 45 weeks might be optimisitic, especially since an inticing release like Nintendogs has given the DS a major boost. But we're looking at sales in the first half of the year, traditionally a slow time for game sales. Theoretically, the gap between the two could close (or widen to a real, substantive advantage) in less than a month during the holiday season.


And this is the exact problem that the GameCube has right now -- the games that sell well on it are Nintendo games.

That's Nintendo's whole problem in a nutshell, and all trends indicate it'll continue on the DS. I agreed with you on the other parts too, so I won't bother quoting 'em. :)

[nate1749]

I always laugh when I read comments about how Microsoft has made millions or even billions off of XBox, when it's really done anything but. Most people don't realize that they took a loss on every unit sold.
Interesting...just did some looking and John Connors reported in late January that the home entertainment division (which includes the XBox) posted a profit; he said on Mar. 10th that he expects the system to be profitable in the next generation with the advances they can make. (And, for what it's worth, Spong.com says XBox units aren't being made anymore to clear store shelves for the new units.)

Yeah, he said the same thing in January. Xbox is not making money, xbox 2 will.... xbox 2 = next generation. I read in January from microsoft's website, from the CFO, about how the 1st gen console was not anticipated to reap benefits, but 2nd was. Still my point though, they have sold a lot of units, but aren't making money. So comparing units sold doesn't give you an accurate estimate - which is what my point was. Sorry for the confusion.

As for the home entertainment industry posting a profit, that's like sony made 5 dollars, nintendo 3, xbox lost 2, so the gaming industry posted a profit of 6 dollars. You say that as if Microsoft is making money, but then in the next line you quote how he said xbox 2 will make money (because xbox1 isn't!).

Nate

[nate1749]

Ack, I just wrote a nice reply and lost it since it logged me out...


Taking a loss on the system and making money back on accessories and licensing and other ways of nickel and diming is nothing new and definitely not a bill gates genius idea. I think just about every new console takes a loss on the console itself, I just remember xbox being excessive.

Most electronics take a very small profit (I think best buy marks up computers only 5% over cost), but make their money on other things (latest scam... warranties). Gas stations make the majoritiy of their cash off of inside sales (ciggerates, pop - not gas) and fast food makes money off of $2.99 coke that cost them a dime, not the 69 cent hamburger that cost them 50 cents.


Ok I can see you're point with the cars. They do compare units sold of camry's versus maximas, however, not with the intent that Nissan will go bankrupt because toyota shipped more units. This mindset of units sold = whether you live or die seems very common among gamers (see any post on this board comparing systems). I even read in Game Informer about systems and the writer was so surprised that you can be #3 (nintendo) and still make a profit. Wait until he realizes you can be #3 and make money more than #1.



Even with a different marketing plan, you can compare the Xbox to the GameCube because the Xbox and GameCube set out to do the same thing -- win as much of the market share as possible.

Different mindsets - there's a profit mindset (historically american) and a market share mindset (historically japanese). Back to cars... Nissan had a large marketshare all through the 90s, but lost money for over 7 years and with the japanese president making no major changes. So they fired him and brought in a european to make some money (not market share) and it worked (go figure).



The GameCube is in trouble for reasons that have nothing to do with the sales of hardware, and it is something that Nintendo has to find a way to fix with the next generation if they want to continue to actually compete in the market.

Excellent, you see that market share is not the live and die factor - which is all I was trying to say. That although interesting to compare units sold - it's really just a small piece of the pie.

Nate

[hydr0x]

Yeah, I checked back and it was hydr0x that said it, but there weren't any real figures given. (BTW, do you have a link back to the comparative study you did?) For what it's worth, I think 45 weeks might be optimisitic, especially since an inticing release like Nintendogs has given the DS a major boost. But we're looking at sales in the first half of the year, traditionally a slow time for game sales. Theoretically, the gap between the two could close (or widen to a real, substantive advantage) in less than a month during the holiday season.

yeah it was me who brought the 45 into play and here's how i came up with it

around two weeks into march i think i checked the total sales of both systems and looked how much more the PSP is selling per week, that lead to 48 weeks iirc. Now, 6 weeks had passed so that's 42, but the last week PSP did not outsell DS, back to 43, DS did even outsell PSP by ~twice the margin the PSP had over the DS before, back to 45

so it IS based on numbers, although not 100% accurate

i know holiday season can change this, but i honestly see Nintendo in the better position for that for two reasons

1) The pure Line-Up for that time looks better (Castlevania, New Mario Bros and so on, all big sellers, maybe even a Pokemon game or something like that? we don't know yet!)

2) The average DS user is younger than your average PSP user, no arguing about that --> the average DS user has lees own money --> the average DS user has got to get more games/systems through gifts --> stronger DS sales during holiday season

just my theory, but we'll see

[syd]

Sales for both of the systems are going to be low now until the fall anyway, since we are now entering the lowest selling point of the season. Until Christmas is over with, I don't think we'll really know who's on top of the industry in hand helds.

Besides, until the PSP lowers it's price a bit then I don't think their sales will be as high as the DS's anyway. $350 (canadian) is to me way too much to be spending on a handheld right now.

However, in the long run when the PSP releases more and better games (right now it seems most of them are sports games, which isn't bad but it's nice to have a variety), then I can see the PSP easily overtaking the DS.

Does anyone have any idea when Nintendo is releasing the new gameboy?

[Nature Boy]

Which war is the DS winning? The Iraq war? The war on drugs? The war of the worlds?

War of the Roses? :)

I'm beginning to think it's the war of the most long winded supporters. ;)

So the thousand year war then? ;)

[goatdan]

Yeah, I checked back and it was hydr0x that said it, but there weren't any real figures given. (BTW, do you have a link back to the comparative study you did?) For what it's worth, I think 45 weeks might be optimisitic, especially since an inticing release like Nintendogs has given the DS a major boost. But we're looking at sales in the first half of the year, traditionally a slow time for game sales. Theoretically, the gap between the two could close (or widen to a real, substantive advantage) in less than a month during the holiday season.

I can't find the link to the thread I did that in. Basically, 6 weeks into the year I took the average amounts sold for the DS and PSP in Japan and compared them with how much differently they were selling. At the time, the PSP had outsold the DS at a rate of 2 to 1 for a week, and people were officially claiming that the DS was dead. I took the numbers and comared them in a lot of ways, and the most realistic trend I could find -- which was the difference in number sold over six weeks divided by six and multiplied to make a year showed that the amount of weeks it would take if sales remained at the same pace as they had been would be something like 50.

That obviously isn't dead on, as the holiday season will change things and it didn't take into account anything like big game releases (Nintendogs, being one of them - just like Grand Theft Auto PSP will be one here) and so on. But it sounds like at least so far, the trend is continuing.


Taking a loss on the system and making money back on accessories and licensing and other ways of nickel and diming is nothing new and definitely not a bill gates genius idea. I think just about every new console takes a loss on the console itself, I just remember xbox being excessive.

In the past, making money back on accessories and licensing was exactly what they were looking for. Microsoft is looking to GREATLY expand that into what they hope become all the features of cable, basically. And then, when they are the OS that everyone has to link their TV to the "world," if they take a penny or a nickel from everyone who wants to see a TV show, they would make bazillions.

This all stems from the idea that Microsoft wanted to try going to a "Pay $0.05 each time you use MS Office and $0.001 per minute while you do!" idea with their products so they would continue to make money throughout their lifespans, but the public (and most importantly, businesses) were very opposed to that idea. Microsoft still wants a way to nickel and dime that has nothing to do with their computer OS or gaming... and that is why it is a revolutionary idea, and why Gates & Co. were willing to lose millions on the Xbox launch.

It is a different approach. The first step in that approach was the first Xbox, and I think we'll see a very much larger one with on May 12th. Will it be good and what consumers want? Honestly, I think it just may be.


Ok I can see you're point with the cars. They do compare units sold of camry's versus maximas, however, not with the intent that Nissan will go bankrupt because toyota shipped more units. This mindset of units sold = whether you live or die seems very common among gamers (see any post on this board comparing systems). I even read in Game Informer about systems and the writer was so surprised that you can be #3 (nintendo) and still make a profit. Wait until he realizes you can be #3 and make money more than #1.

Yes, exactly. Although being #1 in the way of how much money you make is directly tied to how much of the market you hold. With Nintendo not holding much of it currently, they aren't making the money off licensing that a company like Sony is.


Excellent, you see that market share is not the live and die factor - which is all I was trying to say. That although interesting to compare units sold - it's really just a small piece of the pie.

Yes, I've been agreeing with the "not the only factor" for a while -- like I have said somewhere on these boards before -- the market is so much bigger now that a company can be in third place and still making money. If we look at the Atari Jaguar and compare it to the GameCube, the GameCube this holiday season alone sold an estimated three times more consoles than the Jaguar did. Atari was able to keep the Jaguar limping along for three years, when it was clearly third in market share. Now, Nintendo is making money while being in third.

But market share is a much bigger serving than just a small one. In fact, I'd go as far as to say it is probably 50% or more of the story -- not of who will live and die, but who will make the most money in the long run.

[NintendoMan]

Yes, I've been agreeing with the "not the only factor" for a while -- like I have said somewhere on these boards before -- the market is so much bigger now that a company can be in third place and still making money. If we look at the Atari Jaguar and compare it to the GameCube, the GameCube this holiday season alone sold an estimated three times more consoles than the Jaguar did. Atari was able to keep the Jaguar limping along for three years, when it was clearly third in market share. Now, Nintendo is making money while being in third.

This is a very great point that I don't think alot of people realize for some reason. They are curenty still making money. Nintendo itself has quoted before they are the most profitable out of the three console makers. (I don't know if that is completely true or not though)

[goatdan]

Yes, I've been agreeing with the "not the only factor" for a while -- like I have said somewhere on these boards before -- the market is so much bigger now that a company can be in third place and still making money. If we look at the Atari Jaguar and compare it to the GameCube, the GameCube this holiday season alone sold an estimated three times more consoles than the Jaguar did. Atari was able to keep the Jaguar limping along for three years, when it was clearly third in market share. Now, Nintendo is making money while being in third.

This is a very great point that I don't think alot of people realize for some reason. They are curenty still making money. Nintendo itself has quoted before they are the most profitable out of the three console makers. (I don't know if that is completely true or not though)

They are the most profitable in terms of "per console" profit. Because of the sheer volume that Sony sells, Sony is the most profitable in terms of "pure profits."

[nate1749]

and that is why it is a revolutionary idea, and why Gates & Co. were willing to lose millions on the Xbox launch.

Let's go back in a time machine to when xbox 1 was being released, I would love to see the press release that states "we don't plan on making money on this system, just grabbing a share of the market, but on xbox 2 we'll make some cash." No way - as I originally stated, from a financial perspective (meaning the bottom line) xbox has completely dissapointing - even though they've sold lots of units!


It is a different approach.

You could say that, but I see it more as back pedaling rather than this great vision all along. They still want shareholders to back their ideas so of course they're going to be optimistic about the future and all the avenues they have so cleverly crafted to get the consumers cash. Truthfully, industry analysts stated during the xbox release that they were being too optimistic in regards to how many games & accessories the average consumer would buy (which is what would have to happen for them to recoup the huge loss on the unit itself).

So the analysts were right, xbox sold units, but didn't make money.

Back to the original post topic though (psp units vs. ds) and once again my conclusion - units sold is not an accurate indicator of success or profit.

Nate

[nate1749]

Yes, I've been agreeing with the "not the only factor" for a while -- like I have said somewhere on these boards before -- the market is so much bigger now that a company can be in third place and still making money. If we look at the Atari Jaguar and compare it to the GameCube, the GameCube this holiday season alone sold an estimated three times more consoles than the Jaguar did. Atari was able to keep the Jaguar limping along for three years, when it was clearly third in market share. Now, Nintendo is making money while being in third.

This is a very great point that I don't think alot of people realize for some reason. They are curenty still making money. Nintendo itself has quoted before they are the most profitable out of the three console makers. (I don't know if that is completely true or not though)

They are the most profitable in terms of "per console" profit. Because of the sheer volume that Sony sells, Sony is the most profitable in terms of "pure profits."

That comment above should be a stickie on this board.

[hydr0x]

They are the most profitable in terms of "per console" profit. Because of the sheer volume that Sony sells, Sony is the most
profitable in terms of "pure profits."

well, i don't know the actual numbers, but this isn't necessarily true, how many more PS2s are sold? 8 times more? or something like that? that would mean if Nintendo makes 4 bucks per unit, Sony would have to make 50cent per unit, if it's lower than that they are still making less money.... i'm not saying it's like that, just that it is possible (although unlikely with the current gc prices!)

[goatdan]

and that is why it is a revolutionary idea, and why Gates & Co. were willing to lose millions on the Xbox launch.

Let's go back in a time machine to when xbox 1 was being released, I would love to see the press release that states "we don't plan on making money on this system, just grabbing a share of the market, but on xbox 2 we'll make some cash." No way - as I originally stated, from a financial perspective (meaning the bottom line) xbox has completely dissapointing - even though they've sold lots of units!

Bill Gates stated to shareholders before the launch of the Xbox that it wasn't going to be making money, as well as this whole plan for it. As much as anyone can sit around on a message board and say, "Hardware is always sold at a loss! That's why MS did it!" the truth is that hardware has never been sold at a loss the way that Microsoft did it with the Xbox, and it wasn't done that way because Microsoft thought they were better than the world -- they have a long term goal.

The market is pretty much saturated with XP right now. Microsoft can't sell to a market beyond the PC, which they dominate (and for the Linux users in house, great OS but I think we can agree it doesn't hold nearly the market that Windows does). Microsoft can't expand.

People are getting sick of updates to Office every year, and are feeling less and less like they want to upgrade. Microsoft needs a new market. Don't believe me? Here is an article about how they just missed their profit expectations. (http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/04/29/microsoft_misses_views_with_profit_jump/) The most important quotes:

"Microsoft blamed the shortfall primarily on a greater-than-expected decline in commercial and retail licensing for Windows and an unfavorable exchange rate in the past few months."

-and-

"Wilcox said an ongoing concern for Windows is that most people and businesses in the United States who want the software already have it,"

Here's a quick overview of one of the notes that Gates said in a 2001 speech:

"Gates focused on "x" in a couple of areas, too. Touting ease of use as a key goal in his keynote speech, he emphasizing the "extended PC" at the center of the home and touting 802.11b wireless networking as a means of delivering wireless bandwidth to the entire home. Bluetooth technology will, he says, play a complementary role, in lower-power "smart" devices such as picture frames, alarm clocks and home control devices."

...

The "extended PC" concept is what we are beginning to see with the Xbox. You don't seriously think that Microsoft was willing to invest four billion dollars in advertising for the Xbox when every console was losing money if they didn't have some greater picture in mind. They spent $2 billion on advertising, lost something like $150 million a quarter on the system, and then dedicated another $2 billion to advertising after that?



It is a different approach.

You could say that, but I see it more as back pedaling rather than this great vision all along. They still want shareholders to back their ideas so of course they're going to be optimistic about the future and all the avenues they have so cleverly crafted to get the consumers cash. Truthfully, industry analysts stated during the xbox release that they were being too optimistic in regards to how many games & accessories the average consumer would buy (which is what would have to happen for them to recoup the huge loss on the unit itself).

They wanted shareholders to back the idea of a system that they knew wasn't going to make money when they released it originally. They outlined this idea to shareholders so that they wouldn't flip when the Xbox wasn't making money. That is why there isn't a coup right now.

Microsoft needs to expand its market to keeps its insane rate of growth. Becoming the system for receiving entertainment is the easiest way to do just that. That was the goal of the Xbox all along, and it seems to me that Microsoft had the situation figured out.


So the analysts were right, xbox sold units, but didn't make money.
Back to the original post topic though (psp units vs. ds) and once again my conclusion - units sold is not an accurate indicator of success or profit.

But it is a fair way to compare the two systems. They are rather different systems, and would become even more so if Nintendo ever brought out Palm OS... but in a "who's winning the hearts of consumers" debate, which is very important, then how else do you measure it?


well, i don't know the actual numbers, but this isn't necessarily true, how many more PS2s are sold? 8 times more? or something like that? that would mean if Nintendo makes 4 bucks per unit, Sony would have to make 50cent per unit, if it's lower than that they are still making less money.... i'm not saying it's like that, just that it is possible (although unlikely with the current gc prices!)

The thing is that most of the money is made through software sales. Sony is making a small amount on every console sold, and Nintendo is making a small, although probably larger amount on each console sold. But the sell-through rate of games for the Nintendo compared to the PS2 means that Sony is making a LOT more money off licensing their technlogy than Nintendo is. Checking the most recent DP Wire issue:

The GameCube has two games coming out for it this month -- Donkey Konga 2 and Madagascar. By comparison, the PS2 has 12. Software sales alone gives you quite the large difference.

[slownerveaction]

I can't find the link to the thread I did that in. Basically, 6 weeks into the year I took the average amounts sold for the DS and PSP in Japan and compared them with how much differently they were selling. At the time, the PSP had outsold the DS at a rate of 2 to 1 for a week, and people were officially claiming that the DS was dead. I took the numbers and comared them in a lot of ways, and the most realistic trend I could find -- which was the difference in number sold over six weeks divided by six and multiplied to make a year showed that the amount of weeks it would take if sales remained at the same pace as they had been would be something like 50.

That obviously isn't dead on, as the holiday season will change things and it didn't take into account anything like big game releases (Nintendogs, being one of them - just like Grand Theft Auto PSP will be one here) and so on. But it sounds like at least so far, the trend is continuing.

Alrighty, thanks to you and hydr0x for explaining the numbers. I think that the trends in sales for both systems are going to be a bit too chaotic in the near-term to draw any conclusions about long-term sales (I'm interested to see if Nintendogs will continue to boost DS sales), but the # of weeks number does a good job of putting the differences in install bases roughly into perspective.

[zmweasel]

The thing is that most of the money is made through software sales. Sony is making a small amount on every console sold, and Nintendo is making a small, although probably larger amount on each console sold.

I've long been under the research-fueled belief that because Sony develops and manufactures all of its own tech (at least until the multi-developer Cell), it makes buckets of money on each PS1 or PS2 sold, making up for the money it "loses" up front via R&D and prepping for manufacture. (The PSP is diff'rent, as Sony is clearly giving it away to establish market share.) Am I wrong?

-- Z.

[calthaer]

But market share is a much bigger serving than just a small one. In fact, I'd go as far as to say it is probably 50% or more of the story -- not of who will live and die, but who will make the most money in the long run.

Keep in mind that it is possible for one company to amass so much money that they are able to launch a veritable marketing blitzkrieg that crushes the competition, creating a "perceived value" and all that nonsense. This is, in effect, why Windows is the dominant OS. Why on earth would anybody pay $300 for their OS when Linux is absolutely free? It has a perceived value in the mind of the customer, no doubt due to ease-of-use and / or the fact that all workplaces use it.

[PentiumMMX]

Which war is the DS winning? The Iraq war? The war on drugs? The war of the worlds?

War of the Roses? :)

War of the Fanboys?

[GaijinPunch]

This is, in effect, why Windows is the dominant OS. Why on earth would anybody pay $300 for their OS when Linux is absolutely free? It has a perceived value in the mind of the customer, no doubt due to ease-of-use and / or the fact that all workplaces use it.

I think it's 'pecieved value' is why people want to use Linux. With the advent of Broadband, Windows has gotten pummeled by virii, spyware, and hijacking bullshit. Everyone's sick of it, but who the fuck wants to switch? Linux requires far more than a pulse to use as well, which is probably the biggest thing working against it.

[GaijinPunch]

Oops

[zmweasel]

I just found some March NPD/TRST software sales figures for the PSP and DS--the first real head-to-head North American numbers.

PSP's top five:

Twisted Metal: Head On (127,403 units)
Need for Speed: Underground Rivals (121,293 units)
Untold Legends: Brotherhood of the Blade (103,010 units)
Metal Gear Acid (88,362 units)
Wipeout Pure (88,083 units)

DS's top five:

WarioWare: Touched! (113,380 units)
Yoshi Touch & Go (94,069 units)
Super Mario 64 DS (90,094 units)
Pokemon Dash (59,985 units)
Robots (47,150 units)

Hardware sales (DS numbers not available yet):

PSP 620,000
PS2 495,000
XBX 227,000
GC 94,000

And some observations:

* Can the the PSP launch be considered a bust with 620,000 units sold in one week, and at $250 each?

* Christmas is over, PS2s and Xboxes are once again available, and GameCubes are once again rotting on shelves.

* Three of the top five PSP games are first-party releases, while four of the top five DS games are first-party releases. (I consider Sony Online Entertainment, the publisher of Untold Legends, to be a first-party brand. You may disagree.)

* Lumines was the #6 PSP game (65,445 units). I'm curious to see if it turns into an "evergreen," selling steadily month after month, or if it quickly fades like 95% of game releases.

* Robots, the most blatant GBA port in the DS library, making the top five? DS owners are a desperate bunch indeed.

-- Z.

[hydr0x]

The thing is that most of the money is made through software sales. Sony is making a small amount on every console sold, and Nintendo is making a small, although probably larger amount on each console sold. But the sell-through rate of games for the Nintendo compared to the PS2 means that Sony is making a LOT more money off licensing their technlogy than Nintendo is. Checking the most recent DP Wire issue:

The GameCube has two games coming out for it this month -- Donkey Konga 2 and Madagascar. By comparison, the PS2 has 12. Software sales alone gives you quite the large difference.

ehm, you know YOU were talking about money made with hardware, i just replied, no one did mention software as that's of course a different issue

although the exact same applies to software, the question is how much more games is Sony selling through third party, Nintendo has higher fees so they need less 3rd-Party sales. I know Cube 3rd-Party games don't sell at all, but this still makes up for some of the amount. And i guess it's even worse for Sony when it comes to PSP, i can't believe they are getting anywhere near as much money per 3rd-party-psp-game sold as Nintendo per 3rd-party-ds-game

[GaijinPunch]

* Can the the PSP launch be considered a bust with 620,000 units sold in one week, and at $250 each?

No, but it can be considered a disappointment. Sony, as usual, blew their horn... this time about how it would sell out. Even with all the returns (which were a lot) they didn't sell a million. They had a million preorders of the PS2 in Japan, at almost $400 a pop. So yeah... not bad, but definitely not good by Sony's standards.

[zmweasel]

And i guess it's even worse for Sony when it comes to PSP, i can't believe they are getting anywhere near as much money per 3rd-party-psp-game sold as Nintendo per 3rd-party-ds-game

Why wouldn't you believe that? PSP UMDs aren't much (if any) more expensive to manufacture than DS Game Cards, and PSP games sell for $40-50, while DS games sell for $30-40.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

Alrighty, thanks to you and hydr0x for explaining the numbers. I think that the trends in sales for both systems are going to be a bit too chaotic in the near-term to draw any conclusions about long-term sales (I'm interested to see if Nintendogs will continue to boost DS sales), but the # of weeks number does a good job of putting the differences in install bases roughly into perspective.

Yes, basically it proves that the DS is not "dead" as Sony fanboys like to claim, but it is in fact winning in hardware sales right now... but at the same time, the PSP is not really far behind at all, and is on track to surpass the DS within a year, as Nintendo fanboys claim could never happen.


I've long been under the research-fueled belief that because Sony develops and manufactures all of its own tech (at least until the multi-developer Cell), it makes buckets of money on each PS1 or PS2 sold, making up for the money it "loses" up front via R&D and prepping for manufacture. (The PSP is diff'rent, as Sony is clearly giving it away to establish market share.) Am I wrong?

How I understand it, both chips were far enough advanced that the set up of production facilities and the cost to manufacture the initial batches were very high. I definitely would not doubt that the costs of Sony's chips drops very quickly after a year and they end up making a lot more off the consoles at that point.


Keep in mind that it is possible for one company to amass so much money that they are able to launch a veritable marketing blitzkrieg that crushes the competition, creating a "perceived value" and all that nonsense. This is, in effect, why Windows is the dominant OS. Why on earth would anybody pay $300 for their OS when Linux is absolutely free? It has a perceived value in the mind of the customer, no doubt due to ease-of-use and / or the fact that all workplaces use it.

Windows is the dominate OS not because of advertising, but because Microsoft acheived a critical mass of people using it a long, long time ago. The problem is that to switch an entire company over to Linux that has been using Windows is an extremely tough idea, and most companies aren't willing to take that risk -- they would rather pay out the money to Microsoft every year (and since my job is a tech, I'm happy for that. ;) )


* Can the the PSP launch be considered a bust with 620,000 units sold in one week, and at $250 each?

See, here is the thing -- I would definitely say no way, except for the fact that the day of the launch, I was reading an article in the Milwaukee Journel Sentinel that quoted Sony as saying that they were shipping one million units that would definitely sell out launch day, and then they would be shipping them as quickly as possible after that.

Personally, I'd say that it was incredible. That's what -- twice the number of Atari Jaguars that were ever sold? But Sony made it sound like 100% was the answer. I'd like to know what they think of it.


* Christmas is over, PS2s and Xboxes are once again available, and GameCubes are once again rotting on shelves.

Yes, although I'd also like to point out the fact that since the cube has the kiddie image, its best selling time is Christmas, so that partially explains some of the drop.

It still doesn't make the situation any better for Nintendo, of course. It is interesting to see that nearly a half million PS2 units were moved during that time. One word -- DAMN.


* Robots, the most blatant GBA port in the DS library, making the top five? DS owners are a desperate bunch indeed.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing -- especially because it really isn't any improved over the GBA version of the game.


ehm, you know YOU were talking about money made with hardware, i just replied, no one did mention software as that's of course a different issue

No, I'm sorry then you misunderstood what I was saying. I meant to include both of them in that number -- Sony makes up in volume for lower console sales, which as Zach pointed out earlier, Sony is probably making more on their consoles at this point in time too. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that point.


although the exact same applies to software, the question is how much more games is Sony selling through third party, Nintendo has higher fees so they need less 3rd-Party sales. I know Cube 3rd-Party games don't sell at all, but this still makes up for some of the amount. And i guess it's even worse for Sony when it comes to PSP, i can't believe they are getting anywhere near as much money per 3rd-party-psp-game sold as Nintendo per 3rd-party-ds-game

Are you sure that Nintendo has much higher third party fees? That doesn't make sense to me. If people aren't interested in making games for your system because it hasn't sold very well, why would Nintendo crank up the developer fees? If anything, they should be the cheapest in the industry right now just to try to get stuff on there.

[hydr0x]

Are you sure that Nintendo has much higher third party fees? That doesn't make sense to me. If people aren't interested in making games for your system because it hasn't sold very well, why would Nintendo crank up the developer fees? If anything, they should be the cheapest in the industry right now just to try to get stuff on there.

i'm pretty sure yeah, publisher are always complaining about the Nintendo fees. I read an interview with a sales manager from Phoenix Games (that european budget publisher!) recently and they were asked why they only publish their stuff for PS2, answer: "Microsoft doesn't allow us and Nintendos fees are too high"

[zmweasel]

Personally, I'd say that it was incredible. That's what -- twice the number of Atari Jaguars that were ever sold? But Sony made it sound like 100% was the answer. I'd like to know what they think of it.

Yep. I'm dying to hear Sony's spin on the PSP launch at its E3 press conference.


It still doesn't make the situation any better for Nintendo, of course. It is interesting to see that nearly a half million PS2 units were moved during that time. One word -- DAMN.

Crazy, isn't it? That's why I'm getting a Dreamcast vibe about Microsoft launching the Xbox 360 this year. The least powerful home system on the market sold through half a million units in an off-season month, which indicates that casual gamers are still pretty damn content with the current level of console tech. Again, I can't wait to hear Sony's spin.

-- Z.

[goatdan]

Yep. I'm dying to hear Sony's spin on the PSP launch at its E3 press conference.

Me too. I'm actually more interested on what they have to say about that then I am about any of the new console releases.


Crazy, isn't it? That's why I'm getting a Dreamcast vibe about Microsoft launching the Xbox 360 this year. The least powerful home system on the market sold through half a million units in an off-season month, which indicates that casual gamers are still pretty damn content with the current level of console tech. Again, I can't wait to hear Sony's spin.

Sony wanted to make the PS2 last for 10 years, or so they said originally. I think that Microsoft may pull something completely wacky out with the launch of this new Xbox that actually makes people think that upgrading isn't such a bad idea -- I think that we may be seeing the lowest price-point launch that has ever occurred with it, and if you pay for extra features, it will be the most usable "console" in terms of entertainment center for the price. I don't think that Microsoft can or will aim for a strict gaming base, because the Xbox 360 (yeech) isn't a huge step forward over the current Xbox. They have to go elsewhere too...

It will definitely be interesting, but if rumors hold and you can get one without a hard drive, I wouldn't be surprised if that console had a price point of $150.00 at launch.

[slownerveaction]

* Can the the PSP launch be considered a bust with 620,000 units sold in one week, and at $250 each?

They're great numbers by any metric other than the insane hype surrounding the machine, which it had absolutely no chance of matching. It's among the strongest game systems launches in history, at a price considerably above what any mainstream portable has launched at, during a notoriously slow season(and shakey economic concerns in North America). It's a success (so far), will be treated like a success by the mainstream public, and will be spun by Sony as an overwhelming success.


* Lumines was the #6 PSP game (65,445 units). I'm curious to see if it turns into an "evergreen," selling steadily month after month, or if it quickly fades like 95% of game releases.

My question is, Why wouldn't Lumines have legs? I'm sure many PSP buyers who picked up say... Twisted Metal or NFSU2 (okay, I just named the top two selling games, but you know what I'm sayin') will go for Lumines as a next their next purchase over launch-come-latlies like Mercury (which actually looks good, but doesn't have Lumines' "cool" factor") or Rengoku. Game releases for the PSP will sparse for a few months, and Lumines is well positioned, as a sort Tetris for the 18-32 tech-happy set (hey, I'm not claiming to be making original points here!), to have long legs at retail.


Windows is the dominate OS not because of advertising, but because Microsoft acheived a critical mass of people using it a long, long time ago. The problem is that to switch an entire company over to Linux that has been using Windows is an extremely tough idea, and most companies aren't willing to take that risk -- they would rather pay out the money to Microsoft every year (and since my job is a tech, I'm happy for that. Wink )

Ever tried to buy a computer from Dell or Gateway with anything other than the latest version of Windows installed? I'm pretty sure they only offer Red Hat Linux for servers. Unless you're a techie who's building your own computer, your computer is likely to come Windows already pre-installed! Once you've got a product so widely used that it's nearly impossible to ever find the alternative without using the other (i.e. visit a website and DL or order a distro a Linux from a Windows machine), you're in a pretty bad situation.


Crazy, isn't it? That's why I'm getting a Dreamcast vibe about Microsoft launching the Xbox 360 this year. The least powerful home system on the market sold through half a million units in an off-season month, which indicates that casual gamers are still pretty damn content with the current level of console tech. Again, I can't wait to hear Sony's spin.

I get the Dreamcast vibe a bit too. But the DC was practically doomed from the start because of Sega's financial woes. And the state of the gaming industry has changed so much, even since the DC's N. American launch in '99 (proof - a system selling 620,000 units its first week being seen as anything than a smashing success). I don't think anyone will know the full extent of the 360 and its potential to unseat Sony until at least the MTV "public unveiling."

[goatdan]

Ever tried to buy a computer from Dell or Gateway with anything other than the latest version of Windows installed? I'm pretty sure they only offer Red Hat Linux for servers. Unless you're a techie who's building your own computer, your computer is likely to come Windows already pre-installed! Once you've got a product so widely used that it's nearly impossible to ever find the alternative without using the other (i.e. visit a website and DL or order a distro a Linux from a Windows machine), you're in a pretty bad situation.

Although the point could easily be argued that unless you're a techie who's building your own computer, you probably wouldn't know how to install Linux (or Windows for that matter) to begin with. I don't think that many non-tech savvy people who buy a computer are going to want to try to figure out how to install Linux anyway.

The reason that Dell and Gateway don't easily offer those alternatives is because there simply isn't enough demand for it, and Dell and Gateway are both in the business to make money. Linux is a good OS, but due to the critical mass that Windows has acheived, consumers just don't care about it right now. If that mass can be chipped away at (which would be done through more applications that can load and save things the same way as Windows applications), then Linux would be an alternative, and you would see places like Dell and Gateway offer it.