Sales Stats For Wing Commander and FreeSpace
Desslock
>
> Desslock <dess...@desslock.com> wrote in message
> news:3816965C...@desslock.com...
> > Kris Vanhecke wrote:
> > > If 750,000 copies sold wasn't enough, nothing would have been :)
> >
> > You're right - it would have been enough.
> > Sheesh, where'd you get that number? It's not even close to accurate.
>
> Then tell is what is...
[reprinting for space-sim group]
Sure, since you asked. And you can independently confirm them on your
own -- they're freely available at PC Data, an independently run
statistics company that tracks such information. I'd really like to
know how you got a wacky stat like 750,000 --man, that's not even
close. We'd be playing single player Wing Commanders for a long time if
that stat was true (I wish it was).
Here's the information you requested, in plenty of detail:
Wing Commander 3, Heart of the Tiger: 393,465 total units, for revenue
of $15.9 million
Wing Commander 4, The Price of Freedom: 169,000 total units, for revenue
of $7.9 million
I've broken up Wing Commander Prophecy into sales by year, and grouped
in sales of Wing Commander Prophecy Gold:
Wing Commander Prophecy - 1997 sales: 46,000 total units, for revenue
of
$2.1 million
Wing Commander Prophecy - 1998 sales: 100,000 total units, for revenue
of $3.5 million
Wing Commander Prophecy - 1999 sales: 49,000 total units, for revenue
of
$1.1 million
Wing Commander Prophecy - Total: 195,000 total units, for
aggregate
revenue of $6.7 million
Interesting that Prophecy sold more units than WC4 (so much for Mark
Asher's claim that sales have declined with each game in the series),
but the aggregate revenue for Prophecy was lower than that of WC4,
reflecting significant discount sales.
It's no surprise that Origin is dumping single player WC games, at least
for now. UO has 130,000 active accounts, bringing in $1,300,000/month
(aside from the revenues brought in my initial sales). Even if a WC
game sold 50,000 units and had 50,000 active accounts, it would easily
make more than the past couple of solo WC games (especially if you
include SO's sales as a third game in there).
Not surprisingly, Descent FreeSpace sales are considerably fewer, but
perhaps more acceptable to Interplay than the WC ones were to a larger
company like EA. Here's the FreeSpace 1 info:
Descent FreeSpace, The Great War - 1998 sales: 78,000 units, for
revenue
of $3.4 million
Descent FreeSpace, The Great War - 1999 sales: 22,000 units, for
revenue
of $583,000.
Total: 100,000 units, for
aggregate revenue of $3,983,000
In fairness, the number that you've been throwing around may reflect the
"sell-in" number (number initially delivered to retailers) of Prophecy.
All of the numbers above represent the "sell through" numbers (number of
units actually sold to consumers). Sell-in units that aren't sold to
consumers are returned to the publisher.
The WC sales are all good (no kidding), but clearly show a drop off of
revenue since the peak established by WC3. What an amazing success WC3
was, and such a gamble at the time considering the budget. Way to lead
the pack, Origin.
The sales figures are also only PC sales, and don't take into account
console conversions, if any. The FreeSpace numbers also don't take into
account stats on the recent FreeSpace/Silent Threat compilation,
although I doubt that product is racking up the sales.
Hope that's informative!
Desslock
[end reprint]
> That is buls***t. The 750,000 come from Origin, why would they lie. Prophecy
> did sell 750,000 copies.
What are you talking about? Ask Origin if the figures above are correct
-- they won't deny them. Those are the official PC Data figures.
Don't you think Origin would know better how many
> games they sold.
Sure, which is why Origin would confirm the figures above.
Oh by the way FREESPACE is one of the worst space sims I have
> ever played.
Heh, you must be new to the genre. I've played far worse.
Desslock
--
Desslock's RPG News: http://desslock.gamespot.com Latest additions:
Icewind Dale (Baldur's Gate Spinoff) First Look; System Shock 2 Review
and Interview; Updated Ultima: Ascension Interview with Richard "Lord
British" Garriott
Bandit Lesnick
This crossposting can only lead to a flame war...
--
Long live the Confederation,
Ben "Bandit" Lesnick
(lo...@wcnews.com - 302228)
The Wing Commander CIC
http://www.wcnews.com
"You go, LOAF! Get some!" -JPG
Kevin Scholl
Desslock wrote:
> Wing Commander 4, The Price of Freedom: 169,000 total units, for revenue
> of $7.9 million
Well we know that this is absolutely not correct. WCIV cost some $13
million to produce, and we know that Origin got their investment back on
WCIV, and then some.
Kind of throws the other figures into question, doesn't it?
Oh, and one more thing. If in fact WCP sold only 195,000 units through
to customers, and 750,000 were sold in to retailers (et al), would it
not logically follow that the game would be extremely easy to find in
stores? What with all that surplus lying around and all. The figures
presented from PC Data just don't jive as being actual totals worldwide.
===============================================================
From the Desk of: Kevin "Phoenix" Scholl
---------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail Address: ksc...@erols.com
Personal Website: http://www.erols.com/kscholl/index.htm
ICQ UIN: 305090
===============================================================
Gary Holden
figures.
Kris Vanhecke
news:3818CB5E...@erols.com...
> > Wing Commander 4, The Price of Freedom: 169,000 total units, for revenue
> > of $7.9 million
>
> Well we know that this is absolutely not correct. WCIV cost some $13
> million to produce, and we know that Origin got their investment back on
> WCIV, and then some.
>
> Kind of throws the other figures into question, doesn't it?
Sure does... They're only covering 85% of NA.
--
Kris Vanhecke
ICQ 5504559
--
It's hard to look cool when your car's full of sheep.
Mark Asher
<kris.v...@village.uunet.be> wrote:
>Kevin Scholl <ksc...@erols.com> wrote in message
>news:3818CB5E...@erols.com...
>> > Wing Commander 4, The Price of Freedom: 169,000 total units, for revenue
>> > of $7.9 million
>>
>> Well we know that this is absolutely not correct. WCIV cost some $13
>> million to produce, and we know that Origin got their investment back on
>> WCIV, and then some.
>>
>> Kind of throws the other figures into question, doesn't it?
>
>Sure does... They're only covering 85% of NA.
Right. PC Data never has claimed to be comprehensive, but they are a
very good barometer. There are many games that outsold WC:P. This is
not a knock against it, but just an observation. I'm sure that Origin
and EA looked at it and decided that the return on investment wasn't
satisfactory, and they'd rather put their money behind MM WC games.
To me it looks like the market for cockpit sims has shrunk for some
reason, or at least not grown like other markets. Meanwhile games get
more expensive to make every year. I can understand Origin's
reasoning. With a MM game, you can make more money while selling
fewer copies.
Mark Asher
Edward Pang
a lot of cheap ones (hunting sims), and only a few gems... but the
hardcore gamers focus on things like FPS and the occasional RTS.
Sims as a result have been suffering because of the lack of open
shelf space available to them, and what they're going up against.
Namely, way too many games. =)
--
"We can alter the universe to co-incide with itself, but not to fit with
our preconcieved notions. It is the most holy element of our calling."
-- The First Law of LOAF from The Book of LOAF
Get well soon, LOAF!
Albert Woo
Desslock <dess...@desslock.com> wrote:
>
> Sure, since you asked. And you can independently confirm them on your
> own -- they're freely available at PC Data, an independently run
> statistics company that tracks such information. I'd really like to
> know how you got a wacky stat like 750,000 --man, that's not even
> close. We'd be playing single player Wing Commanders for a long time if
> that stat was true (I wish it was).
>
> Here's the information you requested, in plenty of detail:
>
> of $15.9 million
> Wing Commander 4, The Price of Freedom: 169,000 total units, for revenue
> of $7.9 million
>
> in sales of Wing Commander Prophecy Gold:
>
> of
> $2.1 million
> Wing Commander Prophecy - 1998 sales: 100,000 total units, for revenue
> of $3.5 million
> of
I'd be interested to know what Origin's share of the total revenues for the
WC games would amount to. I was under the impression that many companies
sell-in their games for about half the original retail price, so for example
Origin would have earned 3 to 4 million dollars for WC Prophecy (a crude
estimate, I know) in the U.S., and perhaps an equal amount when worldwide
sales are included. If WC Prophecy cost 3 to 5 million dollars (or more) to
produce, and then another 2 million dollars or so for advertising, that
wouldn't leave much left over for the company coffers.
Albert Woo
Mark Asher
wrote:
>I'd be interested to know what Origin's share of the total revenues for the
>WC games would amount to. I was under the impression that many companies
>sell-in their games for about half the original retail price, so for example
>Origin would have earned 3 to 4 million dollars for WC Prophecy (a crude
>estimate, I know) in the U.S., and perhaps an equal amount when worldwide
>sales are included. If WC Prophecy cost 3 to 5 million dollars (or more) to
>produce, and then another 2 million dollars or so for advertising, that
>wouldn't leave much left over for the company coffers.
Well, out of the sell-in price you have to deduct the cost of goods,
about $3 per game if it's just the basic CD, box, and manual. You also
have to deduct the money Origin pays to have the game displayed. Most
of the big retailers charge the game companies a fee for displaying
their wares -- and this cost goes up if Origin wants endcap displays,
standalone displays, games near the cash register, etc.
Also, if you're calculating the revenue you quote on a sell-in price
of 50% of the MSRP, in the case of Prophecy that may be wrong. The
game was steeply discounted within two months of its release. I saw it
at Sam's for $14.95 early on. Either Sam's was taking a bath on it and
unloading product they couldn't move at a loss, or Origin was
discounting it to move copies they had sitting in the warehouse.
I think the game probably made money. It just didn't make enough to
justify continuing the series. Origin can only make so many games, and
they want to put their resources into more profitable ventures. Sierra
takes the same tact -- they don't want to produce a major game that
they estimate will sell fewer than 250,000 copies. That's why the
upcoming Gabriel Knight game is their last adventure game, etc.
Mark Asher
Bandit Lesnick
<2FGS3.804$xd4....@news.rdc1.wa.home.com>:
>I find the sales comparisons between Prophecy and Freespace fascinating, and
>very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
>
>But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
>that had years and years of fan base going for it. Heck, there's a series
>of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's - it's
>a VERY well established franchise.
This isn't necessarily a positive. Having such a background
may have created a loyal fanbase, but it probably also
turned away new users. The number of people-who've-been-playing
-since-WC1 can only get smaller...
>Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history or
>marketing muscle behind it. I'd say for what they were doing...first game
>in a series and all, Freespace was quite successful. And FS2 is getting
>rave reviews all over the place as being one of the best space-combat games
>ever made.
>
>Actually, I didn't care much for FS when it came out. It ran a little slow
>on my (then) 233mmx and I was (perhaps unrealistically) expecting the
>production values of an X-wing or a Wing-Commander. But now that the
>Freespace 'Gold' version is out, I picked it up for twenty bucks and am
>enjoying it very much. It runs great on a 450 with a G400max!!!
>
>-MB
Christopher Reid
wrote:
>I find the sales comparisons between Prophecy and Freespace fascinating, and
>very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
>
>But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
WC3 wasn't *that* big budget considering what they have going
nowadays.. WCP and Freespace were more or less comparable there.
>that had years and years of fan base going for it. Heck, there's a series
>of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's - it's
>a VERY well established franchise.
>
>Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history or
>marketing muscle behind it.
*Descent* Freespace.. by "Interplay" :)
Chris Reid Wing Commander CIC
Chri...@wcnews.com http://www.wcnews.com
Mike from Seattle
very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
that had years and years of fan base going for it. Heck, there's a series
of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's - it's
a VERY well established franchise.
Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history or
marketing muscle behind it. I'd say for what they were doing...first game
in a series and all, Freespace was quite successful. And FS2 is getting
rave reviews all over the place as being one of the best space-combat games
ever made.
Actually, I didn't care much for FS when it came out. It ran a little slow
on my (then) 233mmx and I was (perhaps unrealistically) expecting the
production values of an X-wing or a Wing-Commander. But now that the
Freespace 'Gold' version is out, I picked it up for twenty bucks and am
enjoying it very much. It runs great on a 450 with a G400max!!!
-MB
Desslock <dess...@desslock.com> wrote in message
news:3818643F...@desslock.com...
> Earthworm11 wrote:
> >
> > Desslock <dess...@desslock.com> wrote in message
> > news:3816965C...@desslock.com...
> > > Kris Vanhecke wrote:
> > > > If 750,000 copies sold wasn't enough, nothing would have been :)
> > >
> > > You're right - it would have been enough.
> > > Sheesh, where'd you get that number? It's not even close to accurate.
> >
> > Then tell is what is...
>
> [reprinting for space-sim group]
>
Kris Vanhecke
news:2FGS3.804$xd4....@news.rdc1.wa.home.com...
> I find the sales comparisons between Prophecy and Freespace fascinating,
and
> very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
>
> But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
> that had years and years of fan base going for it. Heck, there's a series
> of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's -
it's
> a VERY well established franchise.
That's the first time I've heard you say that Mr. Berdos...
> Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history
or
> marketing muscle behind it. I'd say for what they were doing...first game
> in a series and all, Freespace was quite successful. And FS2 is getting
> rave reviews all over the place as being one of the best space-combat
games
> ever made.
Yeah, but how many people who do have a brain care for reviews? A great
review is no garantee you'll enjoy it.
> Actually, I didn't care much for FS when it came out. It ran a little
slow
> on my (then) 233mmx and I was (perhaps unrealistically) expecting the
> production values of an X-wing or a Wing-Commander. But now that the
> Freespace 'Gold' version is out, I picked it up for twenty bucks and am
> enjoying it very much. It runs great on a 450 with a G400max!!!
Wouldn't anything? :)
Mike from Seattle
Kris Vanhecke <kris.v...@village.uunet.be> wrote in message
news:LrHS3.129$oD....@afrodite.telenet-ops.be...
> Mike from Seattle <mbe...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:2FGS3.804$xd4....@news.rdc1.wa.home.com...
>
Of course it was a great series. I played all the games (well, most of
them) read the books, I've got a great movie-size WC4 poster over my desk.
But the series got run into the ground by one bad decision after another.
Prophecy, for example, was a very enjoyable product. But a big-budget 'WC2'
is NOT what the franchise needed to keep going. It needed to half new life
breathed into it, and that just never happened. 'Wing Commander Armada' was
a very original product, but after that Origin ran home to mama and get
making the same game over and over with (usually) better graphics and minor
changes, but no real innovation. Maybe Privateer online or whatever they
call it will be a new beginning, but the competition for space-combat games
is getting fierce.....
>
> Yeah, but how many people who do have a brain care for reviews? A great
> review is no garantee you'll enjoy it.
My thought on reviews is 'where there's smoke, there's fire'. When LOTS of
people like something, I'll look into it. I remember getting the original
'X-Com', not because it was my kind of game, but the word of mouth was so
strong and just didn't stop.
> > enjoying it very much. It runs great on a 450 with a G400max!!!
>
> Wouldn't anything? :)
I gotta tell ya, I love this video card!!!
-MB
Albert Woo
figures. Keep up the good work, soldier! :-)
Gary Holden
Christopher Reid wrote in message <381b382e....@news.erols.com>...
>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:19:42 GMT, "Mike from Seattle" <mbe...@home.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I find the sales comparisons between Prophecy and Freespace fascinating,
and
>>very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
>>
>>But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
>
>nowadays.. WCP and Freespace were more or less comparable there.
>
>>of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's -
it's
>>a VERY well established franchise.
>>
>>Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history
or
>>marketing muscle behind it.
>
I think Mark suffers from selective amnesia, he seems to leave out parts of
his information to make his arguement sound better
Mark Asher
<hol...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>Christopher Reid wrote in message <381b382e....@news.erols.com>...
>>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:19:42 GMT, "Mike from Seattle" <mbe...@home.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I find the sales comparisons between Prophecy and Freespace fascinating,
>and
>>>very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
>>>
>>>But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
>>
>> WC3 wasn't *that* big budget considering what they have going
>>nowadays.. WCP and Freespace were more or less comparable there.
>>
>>>that had years and years of fan base going for it. Heck, there's a series
>>>of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's -
>it's
>>>a VERY well established franchise.
>>>
>>>Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history
>or
>>>marketing muscle behind it.
>>
>> *Descent* Freespace.. by "Interplay" :)
>
>
>I think Mark suffers from selective amnesia, he seems to leave out parts of
>his information to make his arguement sound better
Of course I'm not even quoted in the above. It's an exchange between
Chris Reid and Mike Berdos. I guess you're suffering from selective
perception.
But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
poorly, despite stellar reviews.
Mark Asher
Chad Millar
wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:19:42 GMT, "Mike from Seattle" <mbe...@home.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I find the sales comparisons between Prophecy and Freespace fascinating, and
>>very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
>>
>>But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
>
> WC3 wasn't *that* big budget considering what they have going
>nowadays.. WCP and Freespace were more or less comparable there.
>
>>that had years and years of fan base going for it. Heck, there's a series
>>of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's - it's
>>a VERY well established franchise.
>>
>>Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history or
>>marketing muscle behind it.
>
> *Descent* Freespace.. by "Interplay" :)
Its not part of the Descent series, and with all due respect Interplay
isn't that great a name.
Gary Holden
Mark Asher wrote in message <381bb34e...@news.primary.net>...
>On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:42:29 +1300, "Gary Holden"
><hol...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>
>>Christopher Reid wrote in message <381b382e....@news.erols.com>...
>>and
>>>>very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
>>>>
>>>>But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
>>>
>>>nowadays.. WCP and Freespace were more or less comparable there.
>>>
series
>>>>of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's -
>>it's
>>>>a VERY well established franchise.
>>>>
>>>>Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the
history
>>or
>>>>marketing muscle behind it.
>>>
>>
>>
of
>>his information to make his arguement sound better
>
>Of course I'm not even quoted in the above. It's an exchange between
>Chris Reid and Mike Berdos. I guess you're suffering from selective
>perception.
Its more of a typo, mainly due to sending a couple of other posts that were
in response to you, and instead of writing Mike i wrote Mark. It wasn't
directed at you, but then again it could describe your PC Data postings.
>But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
>nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
>poorly, despite stellar reviews.
Descent maybe not as strong, the fan base is still strong enough for 2-3
books to be written. Descent franchise is strong enough to compete. Reviews
can be biased, i looked at D3 in the store, and it looked crap, but then
thats my opinion.
Mark Asher
So what made it a crap title as compared to the previous Descent games
in your opinion? How has it gone downhill? I'm assuming you held the
previous games in higher regard. I just ask because this is one game
that really has gotten rave reviews.
Mark Asher
Mark Asher
>On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 03:13:24 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
>>But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
>>nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
>>poorly, despite stellar reviews.
>
>D3 and HG2 are selling poorly? What's selling OK? Just TS? Listen, D3
>must be doing better then D1 and D2.
Why do you think Descent 3 is selling better than D2 and D1 sold? One
of those previous Descent games was a huge seller, Interplay's best
performing game until Baldur's Gate. I've heard that D3 is a sales
dog, though. There's certainly no buzz about the game other than the
excellent reviews. I could probably pull the PC Data numbers, but I
don't like to bug them too often. They will give me info, but only as
a press courtesy. Normally you have to have an expensive subscription
to get access to their data.
HG2 had only sold about 16,000 copies 4 or 5 weeks after its release.
That's pretty horrible.
Mark Asher
Bandit Lesnick
<1lWS3.303$oD....@afrodite.telenet-ops.be>:
>Yeah, the alt.games.descent people seem to think so too. Asking about
>Freespace there will get you flamed. But the game was certainly marketed
>as 'Descent : Freespace' in the US. I believe they changed that to
>Conflict Freespace for Europe for some reason.
Now, now, Kris, we all know that Europe doesn't buy any
games. :)
Barrie Almond
Delance <ferde...@usa.next> wrote in message
news:381c2bb...@news.newsguy.com...
> On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 03:13:24 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
> >But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
> >nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
> >poorly, despite stellar reviews.
>
> D3 and HG2 are selling poorly? What's selling OK? Just TS? Listen, D3
> must be doing better then D1 and D2.
>
>
Here Descent 3 has dropped to budget price already... £9.99. I'd prolly have
bought it at that price except I hear it comes with the SB Live Platinum and
I want one of those.
--
Barrie "Cpl Hades" Almond
bal...@wcnews.com
Kris Vanhecke
news:8E706599Dlo...@news.erols.com...
> Kris Vanhecke <kris.v...@pandora.be> wrote in
> <1lWS3.303$oD....@afrodite.telenet-ops.be>:
>
> >Yeah, the alt.games.descent people seem to think so too. Asking about
> >Freespace there will get you flamed. But the game was certainly marketed
> >as 'Descent : Freespace' in the US. I believe they changed that to
> >Conflict Freespace for Europe for some reason.
>
> Now, now, Kris, we all know that Europe doesn't buy any
> games. :)
Of course, I must be in *denial*. Thanks for setting me straight Ben. :)
Kris Vanhecke
news:7vhp35$bgo$1...@autumn.news.rcn.net...
> Delance <ferde...@usa.next> wrote in message
> > must be doing better then D1 and D2.
>
> Here Descent 3 has dropped to budget price already... £9.99. I'd prolly
have
> bought it at that price except I hear it comes with the SB Live Platinum
and
> I want one of those.
Yeah, I want stuff too :(
Christopher Reid
wrote:
>On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:27:12 GMT, CRei...@aol.com (Christopher Reid)
>wrote:
>> *Descent* Freespace.. by "Interplay" :)
>
>Its not part of the Descent series, and with all due respect Interplay
>isn't that great a name.
The point is that that name sold more copies than "Freespace: The
Great War" by "Volition" would have.
Derek Smart
wrote:
>I'd be interested to know what Origin's share of the total revenues for the
>WC games would amount to. I was under the impression that many companies
>sell-in their games for about half the original retail price, so for example
>Origin would have earned 3 to 4 million dollars for WC Prophecy (a crude
>estimate, I know) in the U.S., and perhaps an equal amount when worldwide
>sales are included. If WC Prophecy cost 3 to 5 million dollars (or more) to
>produce, and then another 2 million dollars or so for advertising, that
>wouldn't leave much left over for the company coffers.
Most retailers, depending on the shelf price of the title, get between
35-50% off retail from the publiser. So a $40 game they could buy for
as low as $25 in most cases. Thats how they get their markup and how
they can afford to discount the product at will. Factor in cost of
goods (duplication, packaging, shipping, artwork, production,
marketing etc) and the final COG could be as high as$6 per unit.
Depending on the production, marketing budget, development costs etc,
a game could make only about $10-15 for the publisher.
Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
The Battlecruiser Series
www.3000ad.com
"It's not everyone telling me it can't be done that bothers me.
It's them interrupting me while I'm doing it!"
Derek Smart
>Well, out of the sell-in price you have to deduct the cost of goods,
>about $3 per game if it's just the basic CD, box, and manual. You also
>have to deduct the money Origin pays to have the game displayed. Most
>of the big retailers charge the game companies a fee for displaying
>their wares -- and this cost goes up if Origin wants endcap displays,
>standalone displays, games near the cash register, etc.
>
>Also, if you're calculating the revenue you quote on a sell-in price
>of 50% of the MSRP, in the case of Prophecy that may be wrong. The
>game was steeply discounted within two months of its release. I saw it
>at Sam's for $14.95 early on. Either Sam's was taking a bath on it and
>unloading product they couldn't move at a loss, or Origin was
>discounting it to move copies they had sitting in the warehouse.
>
>I think the game probably made money. It just didn't make enough to
>justify continuing the series. Origin can only make so many games, and
>they want to put their resources into more profitable ventures. Sierra
>takes the same tact -- they don't want to produce a major game that
>they estimate will sell fewer than 250,000 copies. That's why the
>upcoming Gabriel Knight game is their last adventure game, etc.
>
>Mark Asher
100% correct
Derek Smart
>But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
>nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
>poorly, despite stellar reviews.
>
>Mark Asher
FS2 is suffering from the same fate unfortunately.
Edward Pang
> On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 11:45:22 GMT, ferde...@usa.next (Delance) wrote:
>
> >
> >>But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
> >>nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
> >>poorly, despite stellar reviews.
> >
> >must be doing better then D1 and D2.
>
> of those previous Descent games was a huge seller, Interplay's best
> performing game until Baldur's Gate. I've heard that D3 is a sales
> dog, though. There's certainly no buzz about the game other than the
> excellent reviews. I could probably pull the PC Data numbers, but I
> don't like to bug them too often. They will give me info, but only as
> a press courtesy. Normally you have to have an expensive subscription
> to get access to their data.
>
> HG2 had only sold about 16,000 copies 4 or 5 weeks after its release.
> That's pretty horrible.
>
They suck. =) As far as I can tell, FO2 did well because of word
of mouth and not due to their marketing people.. who have performed
pretty poorly in pushing Descent3 as a ground-breaking game with
the lovely-looking Fusion engine that handles both ground and space
combat decently. Planescape: Torment's marketing consists of a few
magazine articles, some ads, and a book. One of their better hyped
games, Star Trek: Secret of Vulcan's Fury, got cancelled-- I mean,
'shelved' because of production costs.. and this raised a howl across
a lot of Star Trek newsgroups and some game sites as well. They've
had a bloody poor job of PR and advertising with FS1 and FS2, more
so with FS2. I'm not surprised with that. Only Activision's done
worse, with its Heavy Gear series.
Edward Pang
says...
> >>very revealing. Let's say Freespace sales were 50% of Prophecy.
> >>
> >>But Prophecy was a big budget (not WC3, but still high up there) product
> >
> >nowadays.. WCP and Freespace were more or less comparable there.
> >
> >>of paperback books fleshing out the storyline and ports to console's - it's
> >>a VERY well established franchise.
> >>
> >>Freespace was the 1st game in the series and had nowhere near the history or
> >>marketing muscle behind it.
> >
>
> Its not part of the Descent series, and with all due respect Interplay
> isn't that great a name.
>
there's already a game named 'Freespace' out there. To be blunt,
the marketing didn't work there either.
Jeffrey MacHott
Christopher Reid wrote in message <381c832e....@news.erols.com>...
>>
>>Its not part of the Descent series, and with all due respect Interplay
>>isn't that great a name.
>
>Great War" by "Volition" would have.
>
Actually, it's common knowledge that Descent: Freespace was originally
intended as an expansion pack for Desent 2, except that it wasn't marketed
as such. I have an email somewhere from someone at some computer game
company that says so.
--Ragu Leader
"Unfortunately you have reached tech support" --Electronic Arts Tech Support
Alex Pavloff
wrote:
> Interplay ordered Volition to put in the 'Descent' name because
>there's already a game named 'Freespace' out there. To be blunt,
>the marketing didn't work there either.
Freespace was a drive compression program, not a game.
--
Alex Pavloff - xp...@earthlink.net
/loony/bin - where crazed programmers are sent
Edward Pang
says...
> On Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:54:22 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
> >Well, out of the sell-in price you have to deduct the cost of goods,
> >about $3 per game if it's just the basic CD, box, and manual. You also
> >have to deduct the money Origin pays to have the game displayed. Most
> >of the big retailers charge the game companies a fee for displaying
> >their wares -- and this cost goes up if Origin wants endcap displays,
> >standalone displays, games near the cash register, etc.
> >
> >Also, if you're calculating the revenue you quote on a sell-in price
> >of 50% of the MSRP, in the case of Prophecy that may be wrong. The
> >game was steeply discounted within two months of its release. I saw it
> >at Sam's for $14.95 early on. Either Sam's was taking a bath on it and
> >unloading product they couldn't move at a loss, or Origin was
> >discounting it to move copies they had sitting in the warehouse.
> >
> >I think the game probably made money. It just didn't make enough to
> >justify continuing the series. Origin can only make so many games, and
> >they want to put their resources into more profitable ventures. Sierra
> >takes the same tact -- they don't want to produce a major game that
> >they estimate will sell fewer than 250,000 copies. That's why the
> >upcoming Gabriel Knight game is their last adventure game, etc.
> >
> >Mark Asher
>
> 100% correct
>
shelf space for them... and combined with rising costs, for production
and marketing among other areas...
I wonder if direct sales will make an impact, someday?
Probably not, come to think about it.. at least, not for the next
half-decade or so.
Edward Pang
says...
> On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 03:13:24 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
> >But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
> >nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
> >poorly, despite stellar reviews.
> >
>
> FS2 is suffering from the same fate unfortunately.
>
inflammatory as well - what do you feel the future of multiplayer
games is? =) Real-time strategy, role-playing games, first-person
shooters, or a combination of any of the above? Or something else?
I'm leaning towards RPG elements combined with something
else, if only due to the medium involved.
Derek Smart
wrote:
> Interplay ordered Volition to put in the 'Descent' name because
>there's already a game named 'Freespace' out there. To be blunt,
>the marketing didn't work there either.
I find that hard to believe. They didn't have to put 'Descent' in
there because of another game, they could just have easily called it
something else. The Descent tag was probably just a marketing ploy to
cash in on the popularity of the Descent series and because it was
created by a spin-off of the same creators. Doesn't seem to have done
much good. FS1 sold by word of mouth and merit (it is a kick-ass
shooter, bar none). FS also came out at the right time and just clean
up. Of course, I-War in the US was disappointing, but thats another
story entirely.
Apart from that, I'm not aware of any game called Freespace. The only
product of the same name is a disk product (which I own) by Mijenix
(www.mijenix.com) .
Bandit Lesnick
<s1ptdf...@corp.supernews.com>:
>Actually, it's common knowledge that Descent: Freespace was originally
>intended as an expansion pack for Desent 2, except that it wasn't marketed
>as such. I have an email somewhere from someone at some computer game
>company that says so.
I think the best way to solve this problem would be to make
up some wild assumptions about numbers. For example, the
'2' in Descent 2 is much higher than the lack of numbers
in Descent Freespace. The '2' comes back in Freespace 2,
but it isn't really an improvement, because they're different
flavors of two. Strawberry versus apple-rasberry, if you will.
Also, from this we can obviously conclude that people prefer
things that start with the letter 'D' to things that start
with the letter 'F'. Therein, there will never be another
mech game.
Gary Holden
Mark Asher wrote in message <381c03f4...@news.primary.net>...
Descent 1 i liked original concept
Descent 2 to me was a disappointment as it looked and felt like D1 without
any noticable (to me) added features.
Descent 3 more of the same concept, just better graphics
Gary Holden
Mark Asher wrote in message <381c542f...@news.primary.net>...
>On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 11:45:22 GMT, ferde...@usa.next (Delance) wrote:
>
>>
>>>But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
>>>nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
>>>poorly, despite stellar reviews.
>>
>>must be doing better then D1 and D2.
>
>Why do you think Descent 3 is selling better than D2 and D1 sold? One
>of those previous Descent games was a huge seller, Interplay's best
>performing game until Baldur's Gate. I've heard that D3 is a sales
>dog, though. There's certainly no buzz about the game other than the
>excellent reviews. I could probably pull the PC Data numbers, but I
>don't like to bug them too often. They will give me info, but only as
>a press courtesy. Normally you have to have an expensive subscription
>to get access to their data.
>
>HG2 had only sold about 16,000 copies 4 or 5 weeks after its release.
>That's pretty horrible.
What is HG2 stand for? is it Heavy Gear 2?
Gary Holden
Mark Asher wrote in message <381c03f4...@news.primary.net>...
>On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 20:19:48 +1300, "Gary Holden"
><hol...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>
>>Descent maybe not as strong, the fan base is still strong enough for 2-3
>>books to be written. Descent franchise is strong enough to compete.
Reviews
>>can be biased, i looked at D3 in the store, and it looked crap, but then
>>thats my opinion.
>
>So what made it a crap title as compared to the previous Descent games
>in your opinion? How has it gone downhill? I'm assuming you held the
>previous games in higher regard. I just ask because this is one game
>that really has gotten rave reviews.
>
A while back a game called Ascendancy got rave reviews I bought due to the
many rave reviews, it had a good concept but the game essentially was like
sim type games from the 80's. A waste of NZ$95.
Crap was probably a stupid word for me to use, the games graphics are
beautiful, but from what i was nothing had changed much from the other D's
but with less levels (which are are bigger sized levels, but less levels all
the same)
>Mark Asher
Espen Berntsen
> The joy of a market where there are more games than there is
>shelf space for them... and combined with rising costs, for production
>and marketing among other areas...
>
> I wonder if direct sales will make an impact, someday?
>Probably not, come to think about it.. at least, not for the next
>half-decade or so.
But then it will have a major impact I think. If the developers could sell
the games directly to the consumer (i.e. no distributor like Eidos, EA etc)
the price would theoretically plummet. The only problem is probably that
some marketing/business guy figures out that people are used to pay 50 USD
for a game so they should continue to do so. We only need a faster and
cheaper net for distribution (and a dvd burner in every home).
--
Espen "Nameless" Berntsen
Game programmer at Funcom Oslo A/S
http://www.funcom.com
Espen Berntsen
>So what made it a crap title as compared to the previous Descent games
>in your opinion? How has it gone downhill? I'm assuming you held the
>previous games in higher regard. I just ask because this is one game
>that really has gotten rave reviews.
All hail the knowledgable independent review gods, they must be right. I
actually liked Descent 2. Played it as a student years ago, but I didn't
much care for descent 3. It looks good (I was eagerly awaiting it after
having seen the anims. It got excellent effects) but I just didn't like the
handling, or the story of it.
Espen Berntsen
>>I think Mark suffers from selective amnesia, he seems to leave out parts of
>>his information to make his arguement sound better
>
>Of course I'm not even quoted in the above. It's an exchange between
>Chris Reid and Mike Berdos. I guess you're suffering from selective
>perception.
>
>But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
>nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
>poorly, despite stellar reviews.
It plays like sh** too, so I guess Descent and Freespace has both the good
reviews and bad gameplay (or it migh just be me that's bad at playing them).
Well, counting down to tachyon is released. Anyone know when? I've seen
winter 1999 and spring 2000 as release dates.
Delance
>>D3 and HG2 are selling poorly? What's selling OK? Just TS? Listen, D3
>>must be doing better then D1 and D2.
>
>Why do you think Descent 3 is selling better than D2 and D1 sold? One
>of those previous Descent games was a huge seller, Interplay's best
>performing game until Baldur's Gate. I've heard that D3 is a sales
>dog, though. There's certainly no buzz about the game other than the
>excellent reviews. I could probably pull the PC Data numbers, but I
>don't like to bug them too often. They will give me info, but only as
>a press courtesy. Normally you have to have an expensive subscription
>to get access to their data.
I thought that because today there's a bigger market, and D3 is the
first one made for 3DFX. Apparently it should sell well.
>HG2 had only sold about 16,000 copies 4 or 5 weeks after its release.
>That's pretty horrible.
Considering TS sold a million. Unfair.
>> Delance <<
ferde...@usa.next
Fix adress for e-mail
Delance
wrote:
> Welcome to the wonder of Interplay's marketing division.
>They suck. =) As far as I can tell, FO2 did well because of word
What's FO2? :)
>of mouth and not due to their marketing people.. who have performed
>pretty poorly in pushing Descent3 as a ground-breaking game with
>the lovely-looking Fusion engine that handles both ground and space
>combat decently.
The demo looks great. The Descent series have a name to it... Even
novels... It's strange that it's not doing well.. specially with the
reviews.
>so with FS2. I'm not surprised with that. Only Activision's done
>worse, with its Heavy Gear series.
HG1 was pretty much the MW 3DFX engine adapted to gears. But it's a
good game, and used actors on it's FMV, on the WC3/WC4 fever. It also
have neat music. And a great tour of duty mode.
Mark Asher
wrote:
>In article <382288d5...@news.mindspring.com>, dsm...@pobox.com
>says...
>> On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 03:13:24 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>>
>> >But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
>> >nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
>> >poorly, despite stellar reviews.
>> >
>> >Mark Asher
>>
>> FS2 is suffering from the same fate unfortunately.
>>
> Let's throw something on a tanget and probably a bit
>inflammatory as well - what do you feel the future of multiplayer
>games is? =) Real-time strategy, role-playing games, first-person
>shooters, or a combination of any of the above? Or something else?
>
> I'm leaning towards RPG elements combined with something
>else, if only due to the medium involved.
I'm with you. I think a game like POL is on the right track, since it
will combine RPG elements along with action.
I think that MM RPG games set in a vaguely medieval time period will
continue to dominate, though. For some reason, fantasy seems to be
more popular than sci-fi. (Well, for one thing, it tends to attract
more women. EQ and UO have a much higher percentage of women playing
than you see in other genres, I think.)
I also see room for MM team based games. Think of Team Fortress set in
a persistent world where you have some RPG elements and a base to
protect. Tribes Online, maybe. I think something like that could do
very well.
Verant is doing a MM RTS game. While it looks fascinating, I'd be
surprised if it is ever as popular as Everquest. One nice thing about
-- games actually end, even though they might take 6 weeks or so.
There's something to be said for that. There are some RPG elements in
this as well.
Mark Asher
Mark Asher
>On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 14:42:43 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
>>>D3 and HG2 are selling poorly? What's selling OK? Just TS? Listen, D3
>>>must be doing better then D1 and D2.
>>
>>Why do you think Descent 3 is selling better than D2 and D1 sold? One
>>of those previous Descent games was a huge seller, Interplay's best
>>performing game until Baldur's Gate. I've heard that D3 is a sales
>>dog, though. There's certainly no buzz about the game other than the
>>excellent reviews. I could probably pull the PC Data numbers, but I
>>don't like to bug them too often. They will give me info, but only as
>>a press courtesy. Normally you have to have an expensive subscription
>>to get access to their data.
>
>I thought that because today there's a bigger market, and D3 is the
>first one made for 3DFX. Apparently it should sell well.
Well, it's not. I think the original Descent was out at a time when
there weren't a lot of FPS games besides what id offered, and it was
also one of the first really playable Internet action games. Kali got
its start with Descent. Now there are tons of shooters available and
tons of different games to play on the Internet. Descent 3 doesn't
have that much of an edge anymore.
Mark Asher
Jimmy Chan
>On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:26:29 GMT, haes...@hotmail.com (Edward Pang)
>wrote:
>
>> Welcome to the wonder of Interplay's marketing division.
>>They suck. =) As far as I can tell, FO2 did well because of word
>
>What's FO2? :)
I believe Fallout 2.
Derek Smart
wrote:
You don't need *any* of that to sell direct. Most companies outsource
their production: duplication, packaging, package design, shipping etc
and there are a lot of companies that do. It is only games that seem
to follow this seemingly strict guideline that you need some middleman
and thousands of dollars to put it on the shelf. You don't. If you are
interested in the 'retail numbers', then you have to find a way to
put it on the shelves and the get the retailers to order in large
quantities. It is all about investment. A franchise title does not
require a middleman. Essentially, outside studios (like mine) sign-up
with publishers for two reasons: development money and publishing.
Since publishers double as distributor, there is a fine line between
publishing and distribution. Either way, going to a publisher means
you are still screwed. Period.
Think about this for a minute. If COG for an established title, say,
the BC3K franchise with a fan base and which needs *no* advertising
whatsoever (due to its long history), is $2.50 (it was $1.72 for the
Interplay v2.0 which came with a 40-page mini-guide and about $2.50
for the UK v2.08 which came with a complete 146 page manual and
printed keyboard sheet) and I needed to produce 20K units as a first
run to send to the retailers and online sites (who made money on v2.0x
from Interplay/GTi), it would take *about* $50K. The duplication,
manual layout, box art, cd-rom art, manual printing, packaging and
shipping, can all be outsourced to various companies and in some
cases, a single company. Several online sites already do this. So,
you've now shipping 20K units and it cost you about $50K. So, with the
pre-requisite discounts (if any), you sell to the retailers,
distributors or online sites at an average of $25.00 per unit (about
the same that a publisher would) and via your own direct sales using
an e-commerce frontend (like the one I use on my site via BMT Micro)
from any of the online sites that you can sign-up with (they charge a
small fee per unit) online. Lets say you've now generated $1.25m less
your initial investment. Of course, if you had spent 12 mnths in
development and forked out $1m, then, you'd have to sell more than 20K
units to make any money and/or stay in business. You also have to
factor in returns etc
Now, compare that to getting 20% royalties from a publisher who will
pay you (as a distributing deal mind you) based on this rough formula.
(($25 - $2.5) * 20%) * 20,000 = $90,000
((retail - cog) * royalty) * units_sold = royalty_payment
heh, do the math. Bear in mind that you are also liable for returns
which will get deducted by the publisher during the next royalty
cycle.
In fact, this is one of the reasons why I did distribution deals with
Interplay and GTi in order to 'clean up' the whole BC3K stigma going
back to '96 and both the Interplay and GTi releases, have done just
that because the title continues to do *very* well, mostly because (a)
it is a very advanced, albeit not very flashy (b) is available at a
reasonable price point (because of the low cost of goods and the hence
the price that the retailers buy it for). So, with the good
relationship going with the retailers and online sites, I have no
reason to sign a publishing deal with anyone when I can just outsource
and use a clearing house (such as BMT Micro) to handle fullfilment.
There are other factors such as some retailers wanting to pay on
terms, ie Net 15, Net 30 etc. Thats money you don't have, assuming you
do give them terms (which you don't have to do). And if you have an
established install base and you offer a discount to existing users,
then you have that *guaranteed* income from the repeat business.
So, there is *no* reason why gamers should have to pay $50 for a game
that they can order directly from the developers for $25. No reason
whatsoever.
I hope this helps.
Derek Smart
wrote:
>In article <382288d5...@news.mindspring.com>, dsm...@pobox.com
>says...
>> On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 03:13:24 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>>
>> >But I know you want my two cents anyway. The Descent franchise isn't
>> >nearly as strong as the Wing Commander franchise. Descent 3 is selling
>> >poorly, despite stellar reviews.
>> >
>> >Mark Asher
>>
>> FS2 is suffering from the same fate unfortunately.
>>
> Let's throw something on a tanget and probably a bit
>inflammatory as well - what do you feel the future of multiplayer
>games is? =) Real-time strategy, role-playing games, first-person
>shooters, or a combination of any of the above? Or something else?
>
> I'm leaning towards RPG elements combined with something
>else, if only due to the medium involved.
I don't think any trend will change for sometime to come. They niche
areas will remain as they are.
Further, multiplayer is going to change the way we play games, no
matter how fast the connection and if everyone got a DSL or cable
link. Most gamers still only want single-player. It is always good to
have the option available. There are certain games that you could play
online and those that you could play off-line. You just have to buy
the one that suits you.
Derek Smart
wrote:
>Well, counting down to tachyon is released. Anyone know when? I've seen
>winter 1999 and spring 2000 as release dates.
Spring 2000. They took one look at the competition and went back to
the drawing board (after the uninspiring demo)
Derek Smart
>Jeffrey MacHott <DukeAtr...@yahoo.com> wrote in
><s1ptdf...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>>Actually, it's common knowledge that Descent: Freespace was originally
>>intended as an expansion pack for Desent 2, except that it wasn't marketed
>>as such. I have an email somewhere from someone at some computer game
>>company that says so.
>
>I think the best way to solve this problem would be to make
>up some wild assumptions about numbers. For example, the
>'2' in Descent 2 is much higher than the lack of numbers
>in Descent Freespace. The '2' comes back in Freespace 2,
>but it isn't really an improvement, because they're different
>flavors of two. Strawberry versus apple-rasberry, if you will.
>
>Also, from this we can obviously conclude that people prefer
>things that start with the letter 'D' to things that start
>with the letter 'F'. Therein, there will never be another
>mech game.
LOL, I've got three words for you - seek help quick <g>
Edward Pang
says...
> On Sun, 31 Oct 1999 21:26:29 GMT, haes...@hotmail.com (Edward Pang)
> wrote:
>
> > Welcome to the wonder of Interplay's marketing division.
> >They suck. =) As far as I can tell, FO2 did well because of word
>
> What's FO2? :)
Fallout2, the sequel to one of the best RPGs of 1997. =)
> >of mouth and not due to their marketing people.. who have performed
> >pretty poorly in pushing Descent3 as a ground-breaking game with
> >the lovely-looking Fusion engine that handles both ground and space
> >combat decently.
>
> The demo looks great. The Descent series have a name to it... Even
> novels... It's strange that it's not doing well.. specially with the
> reviews.
As I said - the advertising SUCKS.
> >so with FS2. I'm not surprised with that. Only Activision's done
> >worse, with its Heavy Gear series.
>
> HG1 was pretty much the MW 3DFX engine adapted to gears. But it's a
> good game, and used actors on it's FMV, on the WC3/WC4 fever. It also
> have neat music. And a great tour of duty mode.
>
However, HG1 was basically clunky and a rework of the MW engine,
without much originality. And they advertised MP code which didn't work
either, so... PR screwup.
Desslock
>
> On Mon, 01 Nov 1999 11:25:36 GMT, ferde...@usa.next (Delance) wrote:
>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Welcome to the wonder of Interplay's marketing division.
> >>They suck. =) As far as I can tell, FO2 did well because of word
> >
> >What's FO2? :)
>
Yep - FO2 did very well when initially released, feeding a lot of the
strong word of mouth relating to the original game predominately (I
liked the sequel a ton, but it was buggy initially). FO2 sales died
when Baldur's Gate hit stores, however.
Desslock
--
Desslock's RPG News: http://desslock.gamespot.com Latest additions:
Icewind Dale (Baldur's Gate Spinoff) First Look; System Shock 2 Review
and Interview; Updated Ultima: Ascension Interview with Richard "Lord
British" Garriott
Desslock
>
> Desslock wrote:
>
> > Wing Commander 4, The Price of Freedom: 169,000 total units, for revenue
> > of $7.9 million
>
> Well we know that this is absolutely not correct. WCIV cost some $13
> million to produce, and we know that Origin got their investment back on
> WCIV, and then some.
Those numbers are correct, and reflect sales through most major
retailers in North America. Why do you post that you know that Origin
got its investment back on WCIV?
> The figures
> presented from PC Data just don't jive as being actual totals worldwide.
They're not - they just represent NA figures, from retailers. They
wouldn't cover direct sales from EA, European/Asian/Australian sales, or
from small independent North American retailers. North American sales
comprise the bulk of PC sales from most games made by North American
companies, however, so those figures are pretty telling.
Desslock
>
> Chad Millar <c_mi...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:381bc1ef...@news.bigpond.com...
> history or
> > >>marketing muscle behind it.
> > >
> >
> > Its not part of the Descent series, and with all due respect Interplay
> > isn't that great a name.
>
> Freespace there will get you flamed. But the game was certainly marketed as
> 'Descent : Freespace' in the US. I believe they changed that to Conflict
> Freespace for Europe for some reason.
It was only marketed as Descent Freespace because Interplay didn't have
the rights to "FreeSpace". They bought the rights for the release of
FS2. DF was marketed as Conflict FreeSpace in the U.k. because the
Descent games didn't sell well in the U.K.
Delance
wrote:
>> The demo looks great. The Descent series have a name to it... Even
>> novels... It's strange that it's not doing well.. specially with the
>> reviews.
>
> As I said - the advertising SUCKS.
It's the kind of game that lacks advertising.
>> HG1 was pretty much the MW 3DFX engine adapted to gears. But it's a
>> good game, and used actors on it's FMV, on the WC3/WC4 fever. It also
>> have neat music. And a great tour of duty mode.
>>
> However, HG1 was basically clunky and a rework of the MW engine,
>without much originality. And they advertised MP code which didn't work
>either, so... PR screwup.
HG didn't do well either?
Delance
>>I thought that because today there's a bigger market, and D3 is the
>>first one made for 3DFX. Apparently it should sell well.
>
>Well, it's not. I think the original Descent was out at a time when
>there weren't a lot of FPS games besides what id offered, and it was
>also one of the first really playable Internet action games. Kali got
>its start with Descent. Now there are tons of shooters available and
>tons of different games to play on the Internet. Descent 3 doesn't
>have that much of an edge anymore.
More competition, but also a much larger market. It's doing worse then
the original?
Mark Asher
I don't have any numbers, but I've heard that it isn't selling well,
and this is coming from Interplay. I've heard this secondhand, but
from a neutral source. The lack of sales corresponds to the lack of
buzz for the game.
Mark Asher
Espen Berntsen
>You don't need *any* of that to sell direct. Most companies outsource
>their production: duplication, packaging, package design, shipping etc
>and there are a lot of companies that do. It is only games that seem
>to follow this seemingly strict guideline that you need some middleman
>and thousands of dollars to put it on the shelf. You don't. If you are
>interested in the 'retail numbers', then you have to find a way to
>put it on the shelves and the get the retailers to order in large
>quantities. It is all about investment. A franchise title does not
>require a middleman. Essentially, outside studios (like mine) sign-up
>with publishers for two reasons: development money and publishing.
>Since publishers double as distributor, there is a fine line between
>publishing and distribution. Either way, going to a publisher means
>you are still screwed. Period.
The publisher usually runs off with most of the 50 USD the product costs,
yeah. When we get fast enough lines a lot of money is going to go where they
belong (i.e. at those who actually do the work). The only problem I can see
is that someone is still going to charge the same for the game as gamers are
"used" to pay that amount.
[thnip]
>So, there is *no* reason why gamers should have to pay $50 for a game
>that they can order directly from the developers for $25. No reason
>whatsoever.
Except one thing. Cost. I guess you are from USA. Here in Europe you have to
pay a buckload of money for the time/capacity to download a cd or two. Some
countries has adsl and cable modems, but they are not widely spread. And you
need somewhere to burn the stuff into a cd or dvd, as I (and probably
others) won't have several 0.5-1 gig games installed. I simply hate the
"Minimum install 450 megs" games. Those could just be downloaded as is. But
that is another thread alltogether :)
Espen Berntsen
>> The figures
>> presented from PC Data just don't jive as being actual totals worldwide.
>
>They're not - they just represent NA figures, from retailers. They
>wouldn't cover direct sales from EA, European/Asian/Australian sales, or
>from small independent North American retailers. North American sales
>comprise the bulk of PC sales from most games made by North American
>companies, however, so those figures are pretty telling.
No they are not. They tell only about a fraction of the market. You have the
rest of the worlds retail marked, you have the oem marked (I don't think
they gave away the WCIV dvd to creative to use for over a year as the major
game with the dxr series). 85% of NA sales might be much, but it's FAR from
being representative.
rgrace
ISDN, and it isnt exactly what I would call fast (it took be about an hour
and a half to download the patches for BC3K). Plus of course, we dont get
free local calls (although local call rates arent exactly back breaking). I
am itching to download the demo for the new Ultima game, but the thought of
downloading a 450 meg demo makes me want to throw up.
Rob
Delance
>>More competition, but also a much larger market. It's doing worse then
>>the original?
>
>I don't have any numbers, but I've heard that it isn't selling well,
>and this is coming from Interplay. I've heard this secondhand, but
>from a neutral source. The lack of sales corresponds to the lack of
>buzz for the game.
A shame. People say it's terrific. 2 CDs right? That might mean some
storyline.
Derek Smart
wrote:
>The publisher usually runs off with most of the 50 USD the product costs,
>yeah. When we get fast enough lines a lot of money is going to go where they
>belong (i.e. at those who actually do the work). The only problem I can see
>is that someone is still going to charge the same for the game as gamers are
>"used" to pay that amount.
But, here's the problem. Having a fast download link and a CD-ROM
burner is not going to alleviate the need for a packaged product. I
envision that it will end up being a case of being a low cost
alternative (similar to Amazon.com and others selling all sorts of
products) to buying at humongous prices from the retailer. I don't
think that the online distribution of gaming software (at least not
the large ones) is going to take off anytime soon. I do believe that
the whole e-commerce directive will make it easier to publish,
distribute and ship games in the near future. There are those who are
absolutely adamant about doing any sort of on-line shopping. And it
has nothing to do with not having a credit card either because in most
cases you can just mail in a check or money order. There is just
something about, well gamers in general, going into a store to grab a
title they want, as opposed to waiting for it to arrive in the mail,
even if it is $5 cheaper. Most gamers are impulsive and thats what the
whole impulse shopping is about. Gets them everytime <g>
>Except one thing. Cost. I guess you are from USA.
Yes, I am though I'm half Brit <g>
>Here in Europe you have to pay a buckload of money for the time/capacity to download a cd or two. Some
>countries has adsl and cable modems, but they are not widely spread. And you
>need somewhere to burn the stuff into a cd or dvd, as I (and probably
>others) won't have several 0.5-1 gig games installed. I simply hate the
>"Minimum install 450 megs" games. Those could just be downloaded as is. But
>that is another thread alltogether :)
Again, I don't think e-delivery of games, at least not the popular or
big ones, is going to happen any time soon. Right now, the issue is
about driving down the price of games. The fact that there are so many
games for so little shelf space, seems to have helped as the
publishers and distributors watch their margins disappear. Also, since
retailers will do anything to keep their gamers, returning bad or
buggy software (at least in the US) is now easier than ever.
Derek Smart
<robert...@capgemini.co.uk> wrote:
>That is true. I use the most cost viable option in the UK - that of the
>ISDN, and it isnt exactly what I would call fast (it took be about an hour
>and a half to download the patches for BC3K). Plus of course, we dont get
>free local calls (although local call rates arent exactly back breaking).
Yes it sucks. I can't believe that in all these years, that crap is
still going on over there. No wonder I'm not moving back there to
live, anytime soon. :)
>I am itching to download the demo for the new Ultima game, but the thought of
>downloading a 450 meg demo makes me want to throw up.
I'd barf too...and I have a cable connection!
Derek Smart
wrote:
>Further, multiplayer is going to change the way we play games, no
>matter how fast the connection and if everyone got a DSL or cable
>link. Most gamers still only want single-player. It is always good to
>have the option available. There are certain games that you could play
>online and those that you could play off-line. You just have to buy
>the one that suits you.
correction:
Further, multiplayer isn't going to change the way we play games,
Mark Asher
Some games just don't sell. I think Incubation from Blue Byte is a
nice turn-based game, but it sold like crap here in the US.
Mark Asher
Edward Pang
says...
> On Tue, 02 Nov 1999 01:49:06 GMT, haes...@hotmail.com (Edward Pang)
> wrote:
>
> >> The demo looks great. The Descent series have a name to it... Even
> >> novels... It's strange that it's not doing well.. specially with the
> >> reviews.
> >
> > As I said - the advertising SUCKS.
>
> It's the kind of game that lacks advertising.
I remember the Descent3 advertisements in the
magazines - not very good ones, I fear. Not at all,
nor did they capture my attention. But then again,
that might just be me.
> >> HG1 was pretty much the MW 3DFX engine adapted to gears. But it's a
> >> good game, and used actors on it's FMV, on the WC3/WC4 fever. It also
> >> have neat music. And a great tour of duty mode.
> >>
> > However, HG1 was basically clunky and a rework of the MW engine,
> >without much originality. And they advertised MP code which didn't work
> >either, so... PR screwup.
>
> HG didn't do well either?
HG1? No. =) You should have seen how fast the prices
dropped on that title. And the reviewers were not all that
merciful in quite a few cases. Especially not where they
advertised some MP modes (I think it was the team mode)
which didn't work out of the box - though it was listed as
being available. The mode itself did not exist, and I don't
believe they ever put it in.
Desslock
>
> On Tue, 02 Nov 1999 00:00:24 -0500, Desslock <dess...@desslock.com> wrote:
>
> >> The figures
> >> presented from PC Data just don't jive as being actual totals worldwide.
> >
> >They're not - they just represent NA figures, from retailers. They
> >wouldn't cover direct sales from EA, European/Asian/Australian sales, or
> >from small independent North American retailers. North American sales
> >comprise the bulk of PC sales from most games made by North American
> >companies, however, so those figures are pretty telling.
>
> being representative.
It's actually extremely representative for most North American produced
games. Few North American games sell more than 50% abroad what they
sell in NA, and direct sales are a pretty minor subset of the market as
well.
I actually think the biggest problem with relying on PC Data numbers is
the fact that they ignore the "15%" of non-chain retailers in North
America, such as, uh, computer gaming stores (other than chains like
EB). Purchasers in those stores tend to be the most knowledgeable, and
hardcore gamers, and yet are unrepresentated. I like checking the stats
at local retailers (one at mediascape.com or .ca) to see how they
compare to PC Data numbers.
Kris Vanhecke
news:38200753...@desslock.com...
> Espen Berntsen wrote:
> > No they are not.85% of NA sales might be much, but it's FAR from
> > being representative.
>
> It's actually extremely representative for most North American produced
> games. Few North American games sell more than 50% abroad what they
> sell in NA, and direct sales are a pretty minor subset of the market as
> well.
Anything can be proven with statistics. 75% of all people know that.
--
Kris Vanhecke
ICQ 5504559
--
It's hard to look cool when your car's full of sheep.
Espen Berntsen
<kris.v...@village.uunet.be> wrote:
>> It's actually extremely representative for most North American produced
>> games. Few North American games sell more than 50% abroad what they
>> sell in NA, and direct sales are a pretty minor subset of the market as
>> well.
>
>Anything can be proven with statistics. 75% of all people know that.
And 58% of all statistics are made up anyway.
So PC Data (or what they were called) manages to monitor 85% of 4.17% of
the worlds population. So if they say 200.000 copies are sold, we all hail
the big gurus of America, and don't pay attention to the rest of the world.
Mark Asher
<kris.v...@village.uunet.be> wrote:
>Desslock <dess...@desslock.com> wrote in message
>news:38200753...@desslock.com...
>> Espen Berntsen wrote:
>> > No they are not.85% of NA sales might be much, but it's FAR from
>> > being representative.
>>
>> It's actually extremely representative for most North American produced
>> games. Few North American games sell more than 50% abroad what they
>> sell in NA, and direct sales are a pretty minor subset of the market as
>> well.
>
>Anything can be proven with statistics. 75% of all people know that.
You guys throw around a figure like its gospel and use it like a club
in your arguments. Someone shows you a different figure that isn't in
line with your thinking and all of a sudden "statistics" are no longer
acceptable. You guys are beautiful.
Mark Asher
Derek Smart
wrote:
>I actually think the biggest problem with relying on PC Data numbers is
>the fact that they ignore the "15%" of non-chain retailers in North
>America, such as, uh, computer gaming stores (other than chains like
>EB). Purchasers in those stores tend to be the most knowledgeable, and
>hardcore gamers, and yet are unrepresentated. I like checking the stats
>at local retailers (one at mediascape.com or .ca) to see how they
>compare to PC Data numbers.
That would be www.mediascape.ca
Espen Berntsen
>You guys throw around a figure like its gospel and use it like a club
>in your arguments. Someone shows you a different figure that isn't in
>line with your thinking and all of a sudden "statistics" are no longer
>acceptable. You guys are beautiful.
I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their number
right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
Mark Asher
wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Nov 1999 14:35:37 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
>>You guys throw around a figure like its gospel and use it like a club
>>in your arguments. Someone shows you a different figure that isn't in
>>line with your thinking and all of a sudden "statistics" are no longer
>>acceptable. You guys are beautiful.
>
>
>I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their number
>right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
You think that the North American market that PC Data tracks
represents 4% of the worldwide games market?
Wow.
Mark Asher
Derek Smart
wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Nov 1999 14:35:37 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
>>You guys throw around a figure like its gospel and use it like a club
>>in your arguments. Someone shows you a different figure that isn't in
>>line with your thinking and all of a sudden "statistics" are no longer
>>acceptable. You guys are beautiful.
>
>
>I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their number
>right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
You've gotta be kidding, right? or was that a typo? Are you saying
that PC Data tracks 4% of the worldwide market?
Espen Berntsen
>>I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their number
>>right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
>
>You think that the North American market that PC Data tracks
>represents 4% of the worldwide games market?
>
>Wow.
Depends on how you use statistics. We know it's not the biggest market at
all. We also know that the united states are just 4.16% of the worlds
population (granted, they probably buy more games than for instance
Liberia). Still, it only depends on how you use statistics. When I took some
statistics classes we saw how to use and how not to use statistics.
Espen Berntsen
>>I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their number
>>right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
>
>You've gotta be kidding, right? or was that a typo? Are you saying
>that PC Data tracks 4% of the worldwide market?
The whole world = 100% of market, USA is approx. 4.16%. All depend on how
you choose to use the numbers. There are other factors counting in as well,
of course, but I just ignore it to prove that things are how I say.
Albert Woo
Espen Berntsen <esp...@funcom.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Nov 1999 18:14:59 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
> >>I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their
number
> >>right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
> >
> >represents 4% of the worldwide games market?
> >
> >Wow.
>
> Depends on how you use statistics. We know it's not the biggest market at
> all. We also know that the united states are just 4.16% of the worlds
> population (granted, they probably buy more games than for instance
> Liberia). Still, it only depends on how you use statistics. When I took
some
> statistics classes we saw how to use and how not to use statistics.
Most major news organizations (Time, CNN, Newsweek, etc.) report that the PC
and video game business in the U.S. is a $6 billion a year industry,
surpassing movie ticket sales. Time Magazine also recently reported that the
worldwide PC and video game business is worth about $15 billion a year.
Assuming these figures are accurate, that would mean that the U.S. accounted
for nearly 40% of all PC and video game sales worldwide. While I'm not going
to insist that this number is one hundred percent accurate, I will say that
it reflects reality much better than the 4.16% number. Obviously, there will
be people who disagree with these numbers, but if you do, please offer what
you think are accurate numbers for both U.S. and worldwide sales.
Espen Berntsen
>Most major news organizations (Time, CNN, Newsweek, etc.) report that the PC
>and video game business in the U.S. is a $6 billion a year industry,
>surpassing movie ticket sales. Time Magazine also recently reported that the
>worldwide PC and video game business is worth about $15 billion a year.
>Assuming these figures are accurate, that would mean that the U.S. accounted
>for nearly 40% of all PC and video game sales worldwide. While I'm not going
>to insist that this number is one hundred percent accurate, I will say that
>it reflects reality much better than the 4.16% number. Obviously, there will
>be people who disagree with these numbers, but if you do, please offer what
>you think are accurate numbers for both U.S. and worldwide sales.
I think the market shares is as follows : Japan, USA, England, Germany (rest
of the world) in how big the games marked is. I just don't accept it as
gospel when someone claims that the US numbers is how it is in the rest of
the world. So I just used statistics another way. USA has 4-5% of the worlds
population, and PC Data measured 85% of that. But like they say, there are 3
types of lies, lies damn lies and statistics. You can pretty much prove what
you want with statistics.
Albert Woo
I don't think anyone is arguing with you about whether statistics can be
misused or abused, since they obviously can be. Most people in this group
understand that U.S. sales and international sales don't have an exact ratio
that every game conforms to. Naturally games can and will sell better or
worse in different markets. Since game companies aren't usually forthcoming
about sales figures for games that aren't mega-blockbusters, we can only
rely on past experience to make educated guesses, and past experience shows
that there is some correlation between U.S. and worldwide sales for many
games, especially major titles from major publishers. There are also endless
examples of games that sell as many units worldwide as they do in the U.S.
The PC Data numbers do not make any claims about sales outside of the U.S.,
it's the posters on these newsgroups who are doing so based on that past
experience. In the absence of more concrete numbers, all we can do is make
educated guesses.
Edward Pang
says...
>
> >On Wed, 03 Nov 1999 14:35:37 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
> >
> >>You guys throw around a figure like its gospel and use it like a club
> >>in your arguments. Someone shows you a different figure that isn't in
> >>line with your thinking and all of a sudden "statistics" are no longer
> >>acceptable. You guys are beautiful.
> >
> >
> >right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
>
> You think that the North American market that PC Data tracks
> represents 4% of the worldwide games market?
>
> Wow.
No, maybe 30% of the market. But that's 30% of the market only,
not counting Australia, or most of Europe....
Desslock
>
>
> > >I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their number
> > >right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
> >
> > You think that the North American market that PC Data tracks
> > represents 4% of the worldwide games market?
> >
> > Wow.
>
> No, maybe 30% of the market. But that's 30% of the market only,
> not counting Australia, or most of Europe....
It depends upon whether the developer is North American or not. For
North American developers, sales in NA typically account for about
two-thirds of the sales worldwide.
Desslock
>
> On Wed, 03 Nov 1999 14:35:37 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
>
> >You guys throw around a figure like its gospel and use it like a club
> >in your arguments. Someone shows you a different figure that isn't in
> >line with your thinking and all of a sudden "statistics" are no longer
> >acceptable. You guys are beautiful.
>
> right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
Because it's not 85% of 4% -- you're being ridiculous. Ask any North
American developer and they'll tell you that sales outside of North
America typically equal for an additional 50% of the North American
number. And almost all of that additional 50% of sales comes from
Europe. Direct sales are almost inconsequential. If Wing Commander
Prophecy's sales are "typical" (and they may well not be), then it sold
an additional 100k or so units in Europe and elsewhere, bringing sales
up to about 300k in total, worldwide.
Desslock
>
> Mark Asher <ma...@cdmnet.com> wrote in message
>> >
> > All the game companies rely on PC Data's numbers. Why aren't they good
> > enough for you?
> >
>
> Because they are wrong.
>
> Do the PC Data figures account for sales of WCP Deluxe and WCP Gold?
WCP Gold, yes. I don't even know what the other product is.
Or
> sales in Canada which has a large WC following?
Yes.
They definitely don't count
> Prophecy Classic because that hasn't been released in the US yet...
>
> I wish you'd get over your fantasy that the US rules all and nothing else
> exists because it is seriously affecting your judgement.
Huh? I'm not even American, and certainly don't believe the "US rules
all". I provided the stats, and they're directly from PC Data (which
anyone can check), and any North American company will tell you that
sales outside of North America typically account for an additional 50%
in sales.
Desslock
> > another solo game AND the MM game.
>
> Obviously not, because WCP did sell 750,000 copies
No, it didn't. I thought we were beyond that. Sheesh, I provided you
with evidence that you're now selectively ignoring and going back to
your old crazy figure.
You remind me of that UFO cult from the 70s, that declared that the
world was going to end as of a certain day, but that they were going to
be safe when the UFOs came and rewarded their faith by taking them off
the planet. When the UFOs didn't come, instead of logicially concluding
that "there were no UFOs", they concluded that since the world didn't
end, the UFOs must have saved mankind, so there was no need for the UFOs
to come, but they were still out there. Sheesh.
Gary Holden
Desslock wrote in message <3823A581...@desslock.com>...
>Kris Vanhecke wrote:
>>
>> Mark Asher <ma...@cdmnet.com> wrote in message
>>
>> > If WCP had sold 750,000 copies with a decent margin, they'd be doing
>> > another solo game AND the MM game.
>>
>> Obviously not, because WCP did sell 750,000 copies
>
>No, it didn't. I thought we were beyond that. Sheesh, I provided you
>with evidence that you're now selectively ignoring and going back to
>your old crazy figure.
>
>You remind me of that UFO cult from the 70s, that declared that the
>world was going to end as of a certain day, but that they were going to
>be safe when the UFOs came and rewarded their faith by taking them off
>the planet. When the UFOs didn't come, instead of logicially concluding
>that "there were no UFOs", they concluded that since the world didn't
>end, the UFOs must have saved mankind, so there was no need for the UFOs
>to come, but they were still out there. Sheesh.
>
You supplied info that only counted 85% of the U.S. markets. You didn't show
us much at all or are you selectively ignoring the size of the statistics.
Edward Pang
says...
> Edward Pang wrote:
> > =
>
> >
> > > >I don=E6t think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their=
> number
> > > >right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
> > >
> > > represents 4% of the worldwide games market?
> > >
> > > Wow.
>
> > No, maybe 30% of the market. But that's 30% of the market only=
> ,
> > not counting Australia, or most of Europe....
>
> It depends upon whether the developer is North American or not. For
> North American developers, sales in NA typically account for about
> two-thirds of the sales worldwide.
>
well in Germany - as have a lot of Origin games, since they began
doing German versions and german subtitled software.
Desslock
>
> On Wed, 03 Nov 1999 04:58:43 -0500, Desslock <dess...@desslock.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I actually think the biggest problem with relying on PC Data numbers is
> >the fact that they ignore the "15%" of non-chain retailers in North
> >America, such as, uh, computer gaming stores (other than chains like
> >EB). Purchasers in those stores tend to be the most knowledgeable, and
> >hardcore gamers, and yet are unrepresentated. I like checking the stats
> >at local retailers (one at mediascape.com or .ca) to see how they
> >compare to PC Data numbers.
>
> That would be www.mediascape.ca
Thanks. It's actually not only a great store in this area, but I think
it's incredibly accurate at picking off stats on the 15% of NA stores
that PC Data doesn't catch. In other words, the more sophisticated,
hardcore audience, heh.
Delance
wrote:
>Because it's not 85% of 4% -- you're being ridiculous. Ask any North
>American developer and they'll tell you that sales outside of North
>America typically equal for an additional 50% of the North American
>number. And almost all of that additional 50% of sales comes from
>Europe. Direct sales are almost inconsequential. If Wing Commander
>Prophecy's sales are "typical" (and they may well not be), then it sold
>an additional 100k or so units in Europe and elsewhere, bringing sales
>up to about 300k in total, worldwide. =
Sounds correct, and similar to some movie types. Half on US, half on
the rest of the world.
>> Delance <<
ferde...@usa.next
Fix adress for e-mail
Desslock
>
> Just before I forget, major kudos to Desslock for digging up these sales
> figures. Keep up the good work, soldier! :-)
Thanks, man. To serve and protect, heh.
P. Adams
proclaimed:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul and Cassie Adams a_d_a_m_s_p@a_t_h_e_n_s.net
A thought for Saturday:
He who requires much from himself and little from others
will be secure from hatred.
- K'ung Fu-tse
----------------------------------------------11/6/99 6:55:31 AM--
Gary Holden
Desslock wrote in message <3823A389...@desslock.com>...
Edward Pang wrote:
>
>
> > >I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their
number
> > >right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
> >
> > You think that the North American market that PC Data tracks
> > represents 4% of the worldwide games market?
> >
> > Wow.
>
> not counting Australia, or most of Europe....
It depends upon whether the developer is North American or not. For
North American developers, sales in NA typically account for about
two-thirds of the sales worldwide.
Not nessesarily if a title is popular enough the NA wouldn't make
two-thirds. Not all games made in NA make 2/3 of its sale in the US
Espen Berntsen
>> I donæt think someone who gets 85% of a 4% world market gets their number
>> right. So why should I believe that number any more than others?
>
>Because it's not 85% of 4% -- you're being ridiculous. Ask any North
>American developer and they'll tell you that sales outside of North
>America typically equal for an additional 50% of the North American
>number. And almost all of that additional 50% of sales comes from
>Europe. Direct sales are almost inconsequential. If Wing Commander
>Prophecy's sales are "typical" (and they may well not be), then it sold
>an additional 100k or so units in Europe and elsewhere, bringing sales
>up to about 300k in total, worldwide.
Well, I use statistics the way I want :) The size of market is (if memory
serves) Japan, USA, England, Germany. But then different nationalities liek
diffferent games. So you can't automatically take a trend in one country and
assume it is the same over the whole world. If that is so, you would all do
as we Norwegians.
Espen Berntsen
>>You supplied info that only counted 85% of the U.S. markets. You didn't show
>>us much at all or are you selectively ignoring the size of the statistics.
>>
>If you have better information, post it!
If you have info of same dubious quality, can we post that?
if so, a german distributor which have about 1% of the market sold a lot of
copies of WC:Prophecy (I bet).
Dave Whiteside
wrote:
> --
> Espen "Nameless" Berntsen
> Game programmer at Funcom Oslo A/S
> http://www.funcom.com
>
It all depends on what you are selling and when..
Flight Sims ['cause I know] from Uk developers market is generally
ordered:-
UK
US
Germany
France
Spain
Italy
The top 2 can [and do] switch places depending...
You can sell more games in Spain than France if you do a summer release.
Dave
Rowan Software
Technical Support [today]
and good guy
Delance
wrote:
>> You can always mail order from the web. I got lots of games this way,
>> directly from the US.
>
> Ah, but can you beat the convenience and pricing of
>having a supplier handle all the duties and taxes, so that
>you only pay for the local stuff? ;)
No, but if you can't get it otherwise...
>> Yeah, could get complicated. But most european games have english
>> versions for england (or US outright). Here on Brazil very few got a
>> partial (like WC4 subtitles) or complete translation (voice, etc.).
>> Most only get manuals in portuguese (mandatory).
>
> Aye. But that's how it goes - if it's in English, chances
>are that my store's suppliers get it. That, or if it's in French
>(hey, I -am- Canadian, and so's the supplier, so...)
Doesn't canadian laws require stuff to be in french too?
>> Be that as it might be, there are tons of smaller game types, even
>> smaller then space sim, that still gets good games produced. Space
>> sim, as it is, have a decent number of good games in production like
>> Tachyon, Starlancer, and maybe Phoenix, and some good ones released
>> like X or Freespace 2.
>
> They've had some excellent ones, though I'm waiting for
>the latest crop to ripen (Tachyon, Starlancer). FS hasn't been
>bad for the genre (yay! totally reconfigurable HUD and controls!),
>nor has Independence War (commanding a capital ship smaller than
>a large cruiser), but it's also had its share of dogs (Star Trek
>Academy, Renegade Legion, etc). Well, more than its share. =)
FS has been very good for the space sim games. Renegade and ST were
not that bad (bad, yes, but not terrible).
>Not as much as the Deer Hunter market, but more than its share.
Deer Hunter clones doens't sell as well as the original. Besides, it's
a different group of people.
>> Yeah, but it's a different market. They are not going to forfeit the
>> core market for the casual gamers.
>>
> Um.. they already have begun. Witness the splitting of
>Sierra's game divisions, or how GT's putting out all that Deer
>Hunter-type tripe. Or a lot of other people, for that matter.
>About the only publishers to stay mostly out of that has
>been EA and maybe Eidos.
They are not giving the standard market up. And if you count the
entire core market it should still be bigger then deer hunter.
Edward Pang
says...
> On Fri, 19 Nov 1999 01:14:47 GMT, haes...@hotmail.com (Edward Pang)
> wrote:
>
> >> You can always mail order from the web. I got lots of games this way,
> >> directly from the US.
> >
> > Ah, but can you beat the convenience and pricing of
> >having a supplier handle all the duties and taxes, so that
> >you only pay for the local stuff? ;)
>
> No, but if you can't get it otherwise...
True. And I checked the supplier's DB again - still
no X: Beyond the Frontier.
> >> Yeah, could get complicated. But most european games have english
> >> versions for england (or US outright). Here on Brazil very few got a
> >> partial (like WC4 subtitles) or complete translation (voice, etc.).
> >> Most only get manuals in portuguese (mandatory).
> >
> > Aye. But that's how it goes - if it's in English, chances
> >are that my store's suppliers get it. That, or if it's in French
> >(hey, I -am- Canadian, and so's the supplier, so...)
>
> Doesn't canadian laws require stuff to be in french too?
Not necessarily. It's good to have French on your packaging
however, and Spanish too if you're in the US. =)
> >> Be that as it might be, there are tons of smaller game types, even
> >> smaller then space sim, that still gets good games produced. Space
> >> sim, as it is, have a decent number of good games in production like
> >> Tachyon, Starlancer, and maybe Phoenix, and some good ones released
> >> like X or Freespace 2.
> >
> > They've had some excellent ones, though I'm waiting for
> >the latest crop to ripen (Tachyon, Starlancer). FS hasn't been
> >bad for the genre (yay! totally reconfigurable HUD and controls!),
> >nor has Independence War (commanding a capital ship smaller than
> >a large cruiser), but it's also had its share of dogs (Star Trek
> >Academy, Renegade Legion, etc). Well, more than its share. =)
>
> FS has been very good for the space sim games. Renegade and ST were
> not that bad (bad, yes, but not terrible).
ST Academy? Ugh! That wasn't a starship! Now Independence
War's.. THAT was a starship.
> >Not as much as the Deer Hunter market, but more than its share.
>
> Deer Hunter clones doens't sell as well as the original. Besides, it's
> a different group of people.
Yeah. 'Everyone else' is a huge group. =) And they keep
buying the clones, enough to justify producing sequels to the clones
(Deer Avenger 2, Sports and Field stuff).
> >> Yeah, but it's a different market. They are not going to forfeit the
> >> core market for the casual gamers.
> >>
> > Um.. they already have begun. Witness the splitting of
> >Sierra's game divisions, or how GT's putting out all that Deer
> >Hunter-type tripe. Or a lot of other people, for that matter.
> >About the only publishers to stay mostly out of that has
> >been EA and maybe Eidos.
>
> They are not giving the standard market up. And if you count the
> entire core market it should still be bigger then deer hunter.
Not bloody likely, if you look at the PC data figures.
#1 in retail sales in 80 percent of the stores across the
US translates into a LOT of people. More than the hardcore
gamers.
Delance
wrote:
>> No, but if you can't get it otherwise...
>
> True. And I checked the supplier's DB again - still
>no X: Beyond the Frontier.
No swet. At the latest, you'll have the american release. :)
>> Doesn't canadian laws require stuff to be in french too?
>
> Not necessarily. It's good to have French on your packaging
>however, and Spanish too if you're in the US. =)
Hehehe. Yeah, here stuff is required to have portuguese manuals and
stuff. So for a game to be sold in canada it also have to have manuals
translated, or only a sticker in the box with basic info? Unless is an
imported game, stuff here requires this. (everything should too, but
it's somewhat blury)
>> FS has been very good for the space sim games. Renegade and ST were
>> not that bad (bad, yes, but not terrible).
>
> ST Academy? Ugh! That wasn't a starship! Now Independence
>War's.. THAT was a starship.
Hehehe.. The combat is at least more realistic then on 25th
aniversary. And that was cool. :)
>> They are not giving the standard market up. And if you count the
>> entire core market it should still be bigger then deer hunter.
>
> Not bloody likely, if you look at the PC data figures.
>#1 in retail sales in 80 percent of the stores across the
>US translates into a LOT of people. More than the hardcore
>gamers.
For this one game, this time. Like WC3, a phenomena that doesn't
represent a permanent market. :)
Edward Pang
says...
> On Sat, 20 Nov 1999 01:53:36 GMT, haes...@hotmail.com (Edward Pang)
> wrote:
>
> >> No, but if you can't get it otherwise...
> >
> > True. And I checked the supplier's DB again - still
> >no X: Beyond the Frontier.
>
> No swet. At the latest, you'll have the american release. :)
Whenever that shows up.
> >> Doesn't canadian laws require stuff to be in french too?
> >
> > Not necessarily. It's good to have French on your packaging
> >however, and Spanish too if you're in the US. =)
>
> Hehehe. Yeah, here stuff is required to have portuguese manuals and
> stuff. So for a game to be sold in canada it also have to have manuals
> translated, or only a sticker in the box with basic info? Unless is an
> imported game, stuff here requires this. (everything should too, but
> it's somewhat blury)
It usually only requires a sticker on the box with
basic info though North American and many European producers
throw French and Spanish (and sometimes German) into the box
anyhow, as a matter of course. Besides, this means they can
use the same manuals all over North America. =)
> > ST Academy? Ugh! That wasn't a starship! Now Independence
> >War's.. THAT was a starship.
>
> Hehehe.. The combat is at least more realistic then on 25th
> aniversary. And that was cool. :)
I still don't find flying a huge starship like a Hornet
to be very realistic. =) I'll take Star Fleet Battles anyday
of the week, even if the controls suck.
> >> They are not giving the standard market up. And if you count the
> >> entire core market it should still be bigger then deer hunter.
> >
> > Not bloody likely, if you look at the PC data figures.
> >#1 in retail sales in 80 percent of the stores across the
> >US translates into a LOT of people. More than the hardcore
> >gamers.
>
> For this one game, this time. Like WC3, a phenomena that doesn't
> represent a permanent market. :)
>
WC3 led to WC4, which led to WCP.. and notice that games
with FMV are still out there. Lots of them - Tiberian Sun is one
of them. Myst was said to have been a one-time thing, and look
at how many times they've cloned or republished it. It's here
for a long while.
And as long as they're here, the market for such Deer
Hunter-esque software will dwarf space sims.