This follows the news that hackers have apparently made several breakthroughs in breaching the handheld's copy protection, with one claiming that he has discovered an exploit to take full control of an unmodified system -- although as of yet, no pirated games for 3DS have been demonstrated.
But DreamRift (Epic Mickey) co-founder Peter Ong puts a different spin on the issue. He too believes that piracy is a huge issue, both on the Nintendo DS and now potentially on the 3DS -- and he puts this down to publisher perception of the problem.
"We definitely found that piracy was a significant factor in our Nintendo DS development efforts," he tells us. "When we approached publishers to propose potential game projects with them, most of them brought up their concerns about piracy at some point.
"Many publishers even cited the issue of piracy as a specific reason why they decided to back away from our game project, especially with it being an original intellectual property concept," he adds.
"The publishers' fear was that, in a climate where piracy is commonplace, original games and new mechanics are far less likely to be successful than games based on previously successful mechanics, established licenses, sequels, and sports."
This is the crux of Ong's argument: it doesn't matter whether piracy is actually a real issue or not. If publishers believe it to be the case, then it all falls down for the developers too.
"There's a perception that the parents/grandparents/non-enthusiast/mainstream/etc. are less likely to go about pirating games," he notes. "Now I want to make this point loud and clear: Regardless of whether it's true that enthusiast/hardcore gamers are more likely to pirate than mainstream gamers, the fact that publishers believe it to be true has a very real, unfortunate and ugly impact on games."
He continues, "Publishers end up catering to that type of buyer instead of the enthusiast/hardcore players. This means that not only are gamers presented with more and more sports/licensed/sequel games in favor of original IP games, but also that even within non-original IP games, the type of design and gameplay will tend toward less innovative/risky mechanics."
As he sees it, the threat and perception of piracy is what is hindering and constraining the potential for innovation and new IP, because publishers are looking to play it safe when it comes to game design.
"In DreamRift's experience, publishers tended to be most concerned about piracy on the Nintendo DS in certain regions of the world, such as Europe," Ong explains. "This directly affected the distribution and marketing efforts of our games within those regions."
"A publisher would go as far as to avoid spending the investment necessary to even release our game in Europe due to their projections of how piracy would impact its sales."
This, adds the Dreamrift founder, means that studios are left in the hugely disappointing position of not being able to release their games worldwide, simply because a publisher believes that the piracy in certain regions will overshadow the potential sales.
With all this in mind, Ong is worried about the latest breakthroughs in 3DS piracy.
"Whether or not you should take note of piracy on the Nintendo 3DS as a serious issue depends on who you are," he says. "If you celebrate the decline of one of the last platforms where great games are rewarded and held up as shining examples, then there's no need to be alarmed here. Or if you wish upon yourself (and all other 3DS gamers) a market flooded with uninspired licensed/sequel/sports games over original ideas and mechanics, then by all means there's nothing to worry about."
He continues, "There are so many things that are unique about the 3DS right now as a platform, and to see it falter would be heartbreaking."
"It's a handheld gaming machine that's dedicated to playing games first and foremost rather than making phone calls or checking your Facebook page. It offers a home for passionate world-class studios that aren't so small as a garage-operation, but aren't 100+ person juggernauts. As for myself, I am definitely taking notice, because the day that I have no option but to make a sports game is the day that I must look for a new profession."
He concludes, "If piracy becomes prevalent on the Nintendo 3DS, it will affect DreamRift's efforts on the 3DS detrimentally."
" it doesn't matter whether piracy is actually a real issue or not. If publishers believe it to be the case, then it all falls down for the developers too."
Means, if the one who finances your games is an idiot, you have a problem.
That's not a problem with piracy, but with incompetent decision makers, that were responsible for a worldwide 20+% revenue drop in 2012.
From December 2004 to September 2012 917 million DS games were sold, if a publisher isn't able to do the math and see, that this more then 6 times the software sales of the original Gameboy and 3 times the software sales of the GBA, he should quit his job.
People who take risks (not having enough information ahead of time) and fail often called "idiots" and "incompetent" after the fact.
but exactly how were these people to blame for a worldwide 20+% revenue decline? I just don't see these logical dots connecting (and how any of this relates to this article)
seems to me the major point of the article is the "Thomas Theorem"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_theorem
"If men define situations as real they are real in their consequence"
or as Ong describes it:
"If publishers believe it to be the case, then it all falls down for the developers too."
Of all of these stats you are reporting:
How many of those 917 million were third party titles? (Yes, Mario sells well, but what about unique third party games)
How many were from smaller or mid tier developers? (I can only think of one "moderately successful" small company to spring forth from all these years (2004-2012) on the DS, 5th Cell (makers of Scribblenauts)... and they aren't "wildly successful" (no hits approaching the size of Minecraft, League of Legends, World of Tanks)
In general I disagree with your tone, assertions and analysis. (But you know what they say about opinions)
"People who take risks (not having enough information ahead of time) and fail often called "idiots" and "incompetent" after the fact.
but exactly how were these people to blame for a worldwide 20+% revenue decline?"
I call these people incompetent, because the NDS sold, as I wrote 6x the software of the original GB and 3x the software of the GBA. To bring up piracy as a reason your game doesn't sell, when in fact, software of other companies on the system is selling better then on every other handheld before is what I call idiotic.
This is directly connected to the 20% revenue drop and I can tell you exactly why.
Big publishers like EA ignored the DS in favour of the PSP from day one, this cost them a lot of revenue, but instead of fixing it, they continue to do it.
Last year, EA wasn't able to publish FIFA 13 on the NDS, while they made a PSP version, smart move eh?
And while they weren't able to port their latest NFS to the 3DS, they decided to do a Vita version, a handheld with an install base near Zero.
It doesn't need precog abilities to see, that this NFS won't sell and it doesn't need very much inside to understand why not publishing FIFA 13 for the NDS was a terrible decision.
""How many of those 917 million were third party titles? (Yes, Mario sells well, but what about unique third party games)""
Boring, how many times will this myths be repeated, I didn't searched long, so the first number I found was from 2010. Then the DS had 45 first party games selling more then 1 million copies and 63 third party games selling more then 1 million copies.
Source:http://www.ign.com/articles/2010/02/25/nintendo-boasts-thir d-party-sales-success
"How many were from smaller or mid tier developers?"
Since when is this of any interest, I don't many PS3/360 games from smaller or mid tier developers published in the last 5 years, that sold especially well.
But you don't seem to be overly familiar with Nintendo DS games, otherwise a company like Level 5 would spring to your mind, they really got big with their Nintendo DS games (Layton/Inazuma Eleven), Cooking Mama is another as Majesco isn't exactly what I would call one of the Big Guns, even Zoo Tycoon from THQ sold more then a million copies.
"seems to me the major point of the article is the "Thomas Theorem"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_theorem
"If men define situations as real they are real in their consequence" "
No, this is something completely different, if it were the Thomas Theorem, it would mean, if people believe that there is piracy on the 3DS, then it will have the consequences that piracy on the 3DS has. But that's not the case. Piracy has consequences on different levels not only on publisher/developer level, but also on consumer level and on hardware manufacturer level. These consequences don't become real, just because some incompetent managers running some publishers aren't able to use a pocket calculator.
"when in fact, software of other companies on the system is selling better then on every other handheld before is what I call idiotic."
-- who are these "other companies?" (do you mean Nintendo?).
So of all of these 917 million games over a 8 year period of time the best you could come up with was two "moderately successful" "mid tier titles"... I rest my case, mid tier development for Nintendo's consoles is a risky proposition. (That's all the article and publishers are saying)
Also, I'm confused....exactly what are you arguing?
1) Publishers are stupid FOR NOT taking the risk of developing for Nintendos mobile platform
-OR-
2) Publishers are stupid FOR taking the risk and developing for Nintendo's Mobile platform
...or something else (they are stupid in general or they are publishing games that are not good enough to sell well).
Also...
"This is directly connected to the 20% revenue drop and I can tell you exactly how Big publishers like EA ignored the DS in favour of the PSP, which cost them a lot of revenue and they continue to do it. Last year, EA wasn't able to publish FIFA 13 on the NDS, while they made a PSP version, smart move eh? And while they weren't able to port their latest NFS to the 3DS, they decided to do a Vita version, a handheld with an install base near Zero.
It doesn't need precog abilities to see, that this NFS won't sell and it doesn't need very much inside to understand why not publishing FIFA 13 for the NDS was a terrible decision."
-- This entire thing is speculation backed by no evidence ... Do you know how much it would have cost them to develop the game on NDS? what kind of precedent is there for how much sports games sell on Nintendo's mobile platforms? How much would/could they incurr as a recurring cost from offering online capabilities if the game is pirated by > 50% (I'm making this number up, but you get the drift)
... Business generally takes risks that they seem reasonable... but you are saying that you would know better than the analysts who work for EA and they are "leaving money on the table"... that's a real specious argument considering the folks there are driven to grow their brands and make money.
"So of all of these 917 million or some games over a 8 year period of time the best you could come up with was two "moderately successful" "mid tier titles"... I rest my case, mid tier development for Nintendo's consoles is a risky proposition. (That's all the article and publishers are saying) "
What are you talking about? In 2010 45 first party games sold over a million and 63 third party games. I didn't talked about 2 "moderately succesful" mid tier titles, where do you read such a thing? I talked about 3 series (Layton/Cooking Mama/Inazuma Eleven), from which every entry sold multiple million copies. Do you mind to tell me, where successfull begins for you?
And besides, compared to the PS3/360 every NDS game is small to mid tier development, when it comes to team size and production budget.
"... Business generally takes risks that they seem reasonable... but you are saying that you would know better than the analysts who work for EA and they are "leaving money on the table"... that's a real specious argument. "
It may skipped your attention, but it has been years, since EA reported a full year profit, the recent history of this company consists only of wrong decisions.
Wikipedia has a list of Million sellers dated March 31, 2011 which numbers 139 and almost all are Nintendo/first party titles, of the Non-Nintendo Titles there are many "Ports/remakes" ala Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, and not a single "Sports" game (except Mario themed one)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Nintendo_DS_vide o_games
but more specifically how many titles would you consider developed by "Mid-tier" developers with "new control schemes".
Let the public decide. I think the facts speak for themselves.
For what? For the 63 third party million sellers? I already gave it to you. Or for the fact, that every Layton/Cooking Mama/Inazuma Eleven game sold multiple millions of copies?
Wikipedia lists aren't exactly what I would call a good source... but while we are at it, the Wikipedia list of best selling PSP games doesn't feature many sports games either, except for Hot Shots Golf.
"but more specifically how many titles would you consider developed by "Mid-tier" developers with "new control schemes"."
You completely loose me, what is the next question, how many mid-tier developers with new controls schemes, that have staff consisting 50% of women and that build cartridges from eco friendly materials?
Lemme help you out.
here is the wikipedia list along with and who PUBLISHED the games: (and just for reference this article is called "piracy is a problem because PUBLISHERS say so")
(n) is nintendo
(n) New Super Mario Bros. (29.09 million)[2]
(n) Nintendogs (23.64 million)[3]
(n) Mario Kart DS (22.57 million)[2]
(n) Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day! (18.96 million)[3]
(n) Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (17.57 million)[4]
(n) Brain Age 2: More Training in Minutes a Day! (14.83 million)[3]
(n) Pokémon Black and White (14.71 million)[2]
(n) Pokémon HeartGold and SoulSilver (11.90 million)[5]
(n) Animal Crossing: Wild World (11.51 million)[3]
(n) Super Mario 64 DS (9.65 million)[5]
(n) Mario Party DS (8.21 million)[5]
(n) Pokémon Platinum (7.06 million)[6]
(n) (NorthAmerica) level5 (jp) Dragon Quest IX: Sentinels of the Starry Skies (5.31 million approximately; 4.29 million in Japan,[7] 1.02 million overseas)[5]
(n) Big Brain Academy (5.01 million)[8]
(n) Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Time and Explorers of Darkness (4.5 million)[9]
(n) Pokémon Black 2 and White 2 (4.26 million)[10]
(n) (Northa America) level5 (jp) Professor Layton and the Curious Village (4.17 million approximately; 1 million in Japan,[11] 3.17 million overseas)[6]
(n) Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story (4.13 million)[5]
(n) The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (4.13 million)[8]
(n) Professor Layton and the Diabolical Box (3.36 approximately; 928,089 in Japan,[12] 2.43 million overseas)[6]
(n) Tomodachi Collection (3.2 million)[13]
(n) Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Blue Rescue Team (3.08 million)[14]
(n) Yoshi's Island DS (2.91 million)[8]
(n) English Training: Have Fun Improving Your Skills! (2.86 million)[14]
(n) (NA) level-5 (JP) Professor Layton and the Unwound Future (2.833 million approximately; 862,967 in Japan,[12] 1.97 million overseas)[5]
taito/majesco Cooking Mama (2.827 million approximately: 1.2 million in US,[15] 1 million in Europe,[16] 62,660 in Japan)[17]
(n) Pokémon Ranger (2.7 million)[8]
(n) The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks (2.6 million)[13]
(n) Flash Focus: Vision Training in Minutes a Day (2.52 million)[8]
(n) Kirby Super Star Ultra (2.36 million)[9]
(n) WarioWare: Touched! (2.15 million)[14]
(n) Style Savvy (2.09 million)[6]
(n) Tetris DS (2.05 million)[14]
(n) Pokémon Ranger: Shadows of Almia (2.04 million)[9]
square Final Fantasy III (2 million approximately: 1.06 million in Japan,[18] 460,000 in North America,[19] and 480,000 in Europe)[20]
(n) Rhythm Heaven (1.92 million in Japan)[9]
(n) (NorthAmerica) level-5 (jp) Professor Layton and the Last Specter (1.91 million approximately; 659,504 in Japan,[12] 1.25 million overseas)[2]
(n) Art Academy (1.90 million)[5]
(n) Personal Trainer: Cooking (1.84 million)[9]
(n) Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Mini-Land Mayhem! (1.78 million)[5]
?? Common Sense Training (1.65 million in Japan)[18]
(n) Kirby: Squeak Squad (1.6 million)[21]
(n) Mario Hoops 3-on-3 (1.5 million)[14]
Square/Ubi/disney eidos Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days (1.49 million)[7]
(square) Dragon Quest Monsters: Joker (1.47 million in Japan)[18]
(square) Dragon Quest IV: Chapters of the Chosen (1.46 million approximately; 1.2 million in Japan,[20][22] 110,000 in North America, 150,000 in Europe)[22]
(n) Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Sky (1.4 million)[6]
red octane Guitar Hero: On Tour (1.4 million approximately; 1.1 million in US,[15] 200,000 in UK,[23] 100,000 in France)[24]
(n) Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time (1.39 million)[14]
square Dragon Quest V: Hand of the Heavenly Bride (1.35 million)[22]
sega(na) nitendo(jp) Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games (1.31 million approximately, 338,000 in US,[25] 600,000 in UK,[26] 376.632 in Japan)[17]
ea MySims (1.3 million approximately; 1 million in US,[15] 300,000 in UK)[23]
?? Hannah Montana (1.3 million in US)[15]
square Dragon Quest VI (1.29 million)[7]
square Dragon Quest Monsters: Joker 2 (1.25 million in Japan)[27]
(n) Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis (1.24 million)[14]
(n) Clubhouse Games (1.23 million approximately; 630,000 in Japan,[17] 600,000 in UK)[26]
buena vista games High School Musical: Makin' the Cut! (1.2 million in North America and Western Europe)[28]
(n) Super Princess Peach (1.15 million)[14]
sega? Love and Berry DS Collection (1.12 million in Japan)[29]
bandai/atari Tamagotchi Connection: Corner Shop (1.12 million in Japan)[18]
square Final Fantasy IV (1.09 million approximately; 610,000 in Japan,[20][22] 300,000 in North America and 180,000 in Europe)[22]
(n) Kirby Mass Attack (1.06 million)[2]
(n) Diddy Kong Racing DS (1.04 million)[14]
square Final Fantasy XII: Revenant Wings (1.04 million approximately: 540,000 in Japan, 220,000 in North America, 280,000 in Europe)[20]
thq/agatsuma Drawn to Life (1 million approximately)[30]
wb games/ konami Scribblenauts (1 million)[31]
(n) (eu) level-5 (jp) Inazuma Eleven 2 (1 million shipped)[32]
disney interactive Spectrobes (1 million shipped)[33]
to say this list isn't completely dominated by first party publishing is a farce... (and while it may not agree directly with your numbers, i'd argue that unless nintendo is directly involved with publishing your game on their mobile platform the chances for success are greatly diminished.
please feel free to reply with detailed numbers that prove otherwise.
Christian Keichel, Agree with you there have been more the piracy to effect game developers. They have made bad decisions across the board. To just try, and put all the blame on piracy is a strawman argument.
Michael DeFazio, Also if we are going to use Wikipedia as a source let's go ahead and just use Vgchartz as well. LOL
at least there are sources referenced from the wikipedia article from company financial statements (where applicable), who knows where VGChartz gets there stuff from.
in brief:
I'm not asserting the numbers are exact, but generally speaking are you arguing that they are wildly wrong?
if so name for me some breakout hits from third party publishers on Nintendo's mobile platform for the years (2004-2012). (I'm not saying some aren't making some sort of profit, I'm arguing that publishers are not "idiots"by not trying to focus on Nintendo's mobile platform (between 2004-2012) because opportunities exist elsewhere (IPhone, Android, PC, Console, ...) especially when you look at where the bulk of the sales (between first party and third party publishing) go to.
I am aware of this Wikipedia list, but it seem you are not aware, this is a WIKIPEDIA list, nothing solid, nothing complete, nothing worth quoting?
I gave you a link to IGN, they quoted Nintendo, which were saying in 2010, that 63 3rd party games sold more then 1 million copies - your Wikipedia List doesn't list 63 3rd party games, so even if NO 3rd party game since 2010 sold more then 1 million copies, your list would be incomplete.
Note, that an awfull lot of the titles in your list don't list worldwide shipping numbers, but only Japan or on numbers combined to an undefined "overseas". This list you seem to base your argumentation on is useless.
Ohh I get it, if the numbers contradict what you are saying, refute the source. (and offer no no contradictory source) Also note this says "Developed" by third parties... NOT "Published" by third parties
But lets not be naive here, Give me some accredited source that lists names and numbers of title sales and we all will agree the top 20-30-50-100 whatever will be completely dominated by Nintendo Published titles, then chop out the ports of existing highly popular IP developed by Big Studios and you are left with only a few new IP from third party developers that would be considered successful. (And nothing close to the order of recent console or Mobile or PC "blockbusters")
.... If third parties WERE making money developing new IP on this platform, it would be (in your words) stupid to not continue to milk that cash cow, it is just not the case.
Here is another Gamasutra article which breaks down the issue further:
"Ohh I get it, if the numbers contradict what you are saying, refute the source"
Wikipedia is no source and I gave you IGN as a source two times already, but it seems you prefer Wikipedia, so I looked up some newer numbers and can give you a quote from the Nintendo Corporate Briefing from Oct 2010:
"As of the end of September this year, the number of Nintendo DS titles which had shipped more than a million units since their launches increased by one from first-party developers, which include Nintendo and the Pokémon Company, to come to a total of 46, and by 10 from third-party developers to equal 79. "
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/101029/05.html
Well, the link you gave just has Nintendo boasting that "For DS, 45 first-party and 63 third-party games have also sold more than a million copies.". No list, no numbers. So we have to believe them... We can't even conclude that third party titles had an important share of the 917 millions units sold.
Of course Nintendo wont state that it sucks to be a third party for their platforms (let alone being an indie) while it's public knowledge since the game cube.
"No list, no numbers. So we have to believe them..."
Sure, we can also believe Nintendo is lying to their investors, if this is the case, we should clearly rely more on Wikipedia lists, then on corporate briefings...
VGChartz really? Can we sink any deeper?
Besides, this is an opinion piece, how do you extract numbers from this? And even this OPINION PIECE says:
"In all of this, Nintendo's handheld platforms have not seen any sort of problem in third party support."
I just wanted to point out that Michael's request for detailed numbers on 3rd-party numbers is extremely difficult to obtain legally, which is why they are unavailable. NPD won't release the numbers, people who receive the NPD reports aren't allowed to release the numbers legally, and most third-party publishers do not release complete sales numbers due to them being "sensitive information". Therefore, one can mainly rely on public press releases only. As a point of fact, most of the references for the Wikipedia entry on best-selling DS games are based on press releases or corporate financial results. One can pooh-pooh financial results from Nintendo and say it's all corporate lies, but if the Wikipedia entry they're using uses the exact same financial data... where's the reliable source?
It's the old tree-in-the-forest story: if a third-party publishers sells a million units but nobody is told about it, did it happen?
as a fact so, I know more casual gamers having cracked consoles then core gamers. Mostly because of multiplayer, but still.
I can say for sure there are more cracked Wii on the market then PS3 or Xbox 360. Publishers are just being stupid, and try to find excuses, that's all.
I hesitate to make the same conclusion, Gregory.
Funding something that looks cool but is unproven in the market is risky, especially when physical distribution in part of the equation. Large publishers, whether judged short-sighted or not by some, will make many of their decisions based on the accounting.
Figuratively speaking, everything changes when it is your money on the line.
Of course, if that kind of thinking were the be-all end-all of game development calls these past several years we would have been out an awful lot of sweet games. Thus, let us thank all our Kami-samas for digital distribution and self-publishing...and, I guess, crowdfunding(?)!
Your statement contradict itself because the majority of gamers that use online multiplay are on PC, Xbox 360, and PS3 and less on Wii despite it larger install base. So if the majority of hacking goes on because of multiplay then the PC, PS3 and Xbox360 should be getting the flack. But in this case just information spread around about being able to hack the 3DS makes it automatically unstable for revenue returns according to the people in the article.
I'm guessing this post relates casual gamers to Wii owners, and core gamers to other game consoles even if not on purpose, but I can just say that in my experience dealing with people if I learn of an exploit hack or crack, it usually comes from a tech savvy kid from the age groups of 14 to 20 something. It doesn't matter if its a device, computer, console, or whatever. I believe the knowledge of these things gravitate around sites most kids and young adults of this age group frequent or socially correspond in. Even if the information comes from a hacker that is the age of 20 or above, its mostly aimed at tech savvy kids and young adults of college age. I conclude that the age group has the most time on there hands to figure this stuff out is the ones doing it the most. Hacking is not a plug an play affair much of the time so no time to figure it out = people who do not do it.
The online multiplayer factor is against hacking. You hack your console, you can't connect to the online services anymore. So a machine like the Wii where people don't play online much is more likely to be hacked since there's little consequence in doing so.
I admit to pirating at least 500 DS games, and playing through at least 100 of them. I don't know the exact numbers, but I've played all the main ones that come to mind, and lots of incredibly solid under-the-radar games.
I own about 20 of them, many of which I bought after finishing them with my Flash Card. I would like to buy the remaining that I've played, but there are some issues. I won't buy them used. For one, I'm particular about the quality of my collection, and two, it's effectively and economically equal to piracy for developers/publishers. Then, There are the serious cash requirements. Most of the games I want to pick up are still in the $20-30 range. If I were to buy 100 DS games, this is 2 to 3 thousand dollars. Some games, like Radiant Historia and Okamiden are in the $70 range. Neither of these games are exactly classics - both were released in early 2011.
My failing effort to pay for all the games I've played is a symptom of something larger than "I wanna play games for free".
One of the most basic tenants of economics is that rarity = value. The more rare something is, the more value it has. The inverse is true, and closer to the problem, which is that the less rare something is, the less value it has.
We live in a world of virtually limitless entertainment options. I don't think it's possible to play every play-worthy game on Xbox, PS3, PC, and the handhelds that come out each month. And then, there's the music, the movies, the tv shows, the books, and all the other stuff people pirate. Each unit of Entertainment (one game, one movie, etc) doesn't have much value due to how saturated the market is with other units of entertainment. At least, each unit doesn't have as much value as the market assumes they do. There are some outliers, like the COD games, whose price point clearly matches the market's desire to pay, but there are far more games that just don't, particularly on consoles. Subjectively, I would argue that Ghost Trick is more valuable than COD on many levels (intriguing and unique game design, great narrative, amazing art, etc), just not on the economic level. The sad truth is that most gamers aren't as interested in a game like Ghost Trick, 999, Devil Survivor, or Nostalgia, as they are in Halo, Assassin's Creed, and COD. It's not to say the latter games aren't good games, but they're in demand enough that the price point can be justified.
Most people I know that pirate don't spend that much time with each thing they pirate. They treat all the new entertainment as sort of a buffet. Why has Netflix gotten so popular with their streaming? Because there are so many movies and tv shows that are available, that no one wants to buy a season of Bob's Burgers just to find out if they like it or not. Since Netflix, my pirating of tv and movies has plummeted to near zero. I'm happy paying my $10/month and explore media without a huge amount of risk.
Risk is a huge factor in piracy. We can all tell tales of that game that was going to be awesome, we bought it on launch day, and it just wasn't that good. Or what about those games that really are good, you bought, and just never got around to playing? I have stacks of $60 purchases that I could get new for $20 now. What's worse, the games you wanted to get and never did because you knew you just didn't have the time - but you're really missing out on an amazing under-the-radar game that as a game designer, you know you should play through and analyze. And then there are those games you just don't know about, because they're not popular - they could be good, or they could be bad. There could be a couple nuggets of game design genius hidden inside, or they could be pure genius, but you just don't know if its for you. 999 was an amazing game, but it's hard to tell if you'd like it or not based on someone else's opinion. $35 dollars is a good chunk of money to play something for 20 minutes and forever put back on your shelf. Buying a game is like an investment. When there's too much risk, you naturally avoid it.
So really, for me, it comes down to Risk and Cost. I've been burned so much that I'm not as daring, and I don't have money ready to be thrown to the streets. Is there much of a difference between spending that 2 grand on DS games vs dropping it in slot machines in hopes of a great return?
Right now, there are three near-similar trends in game development that have been on a massive rise in the last 3 years or so: Freemium, Mobile, and Indie Games. Both tend to be low cost ($1 to $15), and neither have massive risk. Are Faster than Light or To the Moon good? Spend $5 (less than lunch) on it during a Steam sale and find out. Is Angry Birds fun? Play a free version with ads. Is the Secret World a fun MMO? Play it, it's now a Fremium game now. Does Planetside 2 compare to other FPS games? Just install it. Low cost, low risk, near buffet style gaming.
Piracy isn't a cause of poor industry economics. It's a symptom. It's a market force. Rather than working so hard to attack it as if it were a cause, developers and publishers of media need to recognize it as any other form of competition. They need to understand why people pirate, and they need to make legal routes that work. Netflix is a great example of this.
Economic flow is similar to lightning: it takes the path of least resistance.
So would you advocate games to become more like cable TV? In cable TV you have different models of play, where one service is free but with streaming ads. One service is pay per play. One service is subscript based much like an HBO (you pay extra fees on top of paying a cable provider fee monthly.) and one service is rental streaming. Pay a fee to play and when the time runs out you have to pay for another rent. I don't know if it will kill the piracy problem even if gaming was offered like that, buffet style.
The reason Netflix works is because rather than spending the time and effort tracking down the content, it's all laid out for you to consume as you will. Throwing down $10 a month to avoid legal risk and the time and effort of finding the content yourself is a good deal. Throwing in the "people who liked this like X" list makes selection of quality easier as well. Plus, if I watch a few minutes of something and don't like it, all I lost was those few minutes.
If someone did the same for games, I would be thrilled to sign up.
You summed up the major point I was making nicely. Netflix is low risk and low cost, as well as being a path of lesser resistance vs piracy. That's exactly what the gaming industry needs.
@A W:
Some of these methods of game delivery already exist. We have Gametap and Gamefly, but unfortunately, both services are lacking. Gametap lacks a decent library, and Gamefly has slow shipping and long queues. I'm partial to Steam and Gog.com, as they've both got great libraries and great prices, but they're still not quite there.
Not only do we need a better system for delivering games, but that system needs to be well executed.
There are also some other complications that are unique to games. They are often large in file size or requires heavy processing to run, and have to be lag-free. Players also like to collect game saves. Games also have to be accessible on demand.
A purely digital / streaming solution doesn't really work out for these issues all the time.
Amazon's Audible has a subscription method where you pay like $15/mo and you get one DRM-free audio book, and then any audio book you buy while a member is heavily reduced in price. I'm not sure this is a viable solution for games, but it might be worth it to draw inspiration from this system.
There may be other solutions, and some solutions like Steam have already helped a great deal, but we still have to make some more progress to cut down on piracy.
Personally, I feel that the best way to combat piracy is to just reduce the price of the goods.
Economists use the term 'market equilibrium' to define the exact point where supply crosses demand. Market equilibrium is the intersection of the highest price at which the consumer is comfortable spending and the lowest price the producer is comfortable selling. Right now, I believe that the current retail price is well above market equilibrium.
At first, it seems that the producer benefits greatly from a price above ME since they're selling their goods for more, but the negative side of that is that a black market is formed. A black market formed in the media industry manifests as bootlegging and piracy. The consumer just isn't as comfortable, on average, paying the higher prices and so they seek alternatives. Some are fine with the inflated price, and others aren't. The further from ME, the more skewed that ratio becomes towards the black market.
It would also seem that if the price was below market equilibrium, that it's beneficial to the consumer, but this isn't true either. If the producer is not able to make more money than they spend, they can no longer produce, and the consumer has nothing to consume.
It's the role of the producer to set the price as close to what they believe market equilibrium is. The closer to the ME they can get, the higher the profit.
The used games market is huge right now, and that's a reflection of the inflated price. Consumers are much more comfortable paying the used price, not because it's lower, but because it's closer to the ME. They're willing to buy games with scratches, stickers attached, missing or damaged manuals, and generic boxes, just to pay closer to what they feel is fair. Sure, if new games were $20 and used ones were $10, you'd still have people buying the used games, but not as many as there are now.
Unfortunately, the 'mainsteam' entertainment industries seem to disagree entirely, and instead of trying to compete with piracy, theyre trying to pass bills like SOPA/PIPA/ACTA and other draconian network spying practices, and working on getting new generations of consoles to reject used copies of games. They're trying to attack their own consumers. This practice has never worked out long term for any producer of any good in the past. Vader-grip monopolies and market manipulation just doesn't work for industries that produce goods that aren't vital to sustaining life, because the consumer becomes the new producer - something we can partially claim to the success of indie games in recent years.
The big publishers are absolutely terrified of price experimentation. They *want* the idea of the standard price to stay at $60 so people will still shell out that much for the big name releases.
Steam and other digital distribution companies and the independents are making it harder and harder for the big guys to hold on to that dream, so they're panicking.
'"The publishers' fear was that, in a climate where piracy is commonplace, original games and new mechanics are far less likely to be successful than games based on previously successful mechanics, established licenses, sequels, and sports."'
I'm sorry, but I've heard publishers use this exact excuse for so many things other than piracy that I can't take it seriously at all.
I've always found it odd that speaking out against thieves/piracy/stealing is considered a bad thing that can get you in trouble. It's important to note though that the people attacking, are a vocal minority. I think the vast majority of consumers agree with the idea that it's wrong to pirate.
I don't know if speaking out about piracy gets you in trouble, but a lot of people will react negatively when it looks like they are being insincere or lazy about it. I don't really see much in this comments section stating 'piracy is great', or even 'piracy is not wrong', but rather 'this does not look at the problem, or even attempt to search for valid, helpful solutions'
The article linked by this one has someone blaming piracy for a 50% loss of sales, but he has no stats on piracy of his product, nor did the effects of piracy change on that platform during that loss (his first and second game came out both while the R4 cart was popular, which doesn't explain why he doesn't cite piracy as an issue for the first game, or why sales declined between versions). He's not bringing anything to the table, he's scapegoating for the shortcomings of the project. Similarly the RIAA and MPAA and some Game organizations are pointing at piracy as a major issue, but on the flip side, you have new distribution services (Netflix, iTunes, Steam) making record profits year-on-year in those exact same areas. Piracy is affecting different companies and different models at different rates, and instead of adapting and providing services on par with Apple or Valve, some people would rather muzzle some of the major benefits of the internet and use pirates as they would patents (as a form of legal bullying and another revenue stream, by suing for exorbitant sums).
People are not being attacked for speaking out against piracy, but they will be called out for using it as a scapegoat (since it's a VERY hard to pin down loss of sales value, you can estimate it as 1%-100% lost sales making for a good unprovable scapegoat), and will blame piracy first, before looking internally and at the competition that is successful in spite of piracy.
Maybe once we can get Shoplifting down to 0% we can start to think about how to actually stop piracy. Until then we need to be thinking of alternative forms of business, not extensive, muzzling legislation and technological lockouts.
Edit: I should add that I do not agree with piracy, and do not do it. I am 100% against piracy and give colleagues and friends crap about pirating. But I agree even less with the current lobbying going on, the increased closure of services and devices to attempt to curb piracy, since it involves destroying a lot of great potential capabilities at the cost of a few delinquents, like adding mandatory strip searches at a checkout to curb shoplifting. We need to attack 'piracy as a scapegoat' and 'blame piracy instead of adapting to the digital culture of immediacy', because if no-one speaks up about it, we are going to end up 'cutting off the hand to save the finger' so to speak.
Lots of people agree its wrong, but do their actions suggest its wrong. I for one am not arguing on the merits of it being right. My argument stems from the fact that one device is being singled out from the rest of the market, and we are being told by company x that it wants to pull its games based off of circulated information rather than show actual data on why piracy is more of a problem on this device that it is on other devices. Then this article is written in poor defense of why company X can justify its claims. They pass the buck on to the consumer and say "Why u no buy?" and then say "It because u pirate!" then this article shows up saying "if publisher believe it, it must be true. Don't shoot messenger."
I don't see speaking against piracy his wrong it's mainly just the hypocrisy. We have a group all ready stating the will drop support for a system. If a problem that hasn't happen yet happens. What's with this kind of thing. The PSP was the most hacked system of all time. Which hurt it in the US, but western developers don't make handheld games. All the time the Japanese market still make games for the system even to this day. The same goes for every other console on the market. All had some sorts of piracy, and let's not even mention the PC. Yet these system developers have never come out, and said ok we are dropping our support. If you afraid of piracy be afraid across the board. You can't pick and choose when your going to take that risk.
"The publishers' fear was that, in a climate where piracy is commonplace, original games and new mechanics are far less likely to be successful than games based on previously successful mechanics, established licenses, sequels, and sports."
Saying piracy is bad is ok in my book. Saying piracy is the reason we gotta make shitty sequels, sport games and shut down original IP then someone is bound to get pissed. Considering those 3 things are some of the biggest criticisms thrown at the industry.
Piracy exists on every platform but is carried out by people who don't care about the medium. The "casual" players are more likely to use hacks then the dedicated fans cause they don't give a damn about our work or our jobs. Video games to some of us are a way of life but for the mass market they are just a toy which they don't respect enough to pay for. Gaming is and probably will always be a niche cause it takes effort and dedication, something many do not have in abundance. I'm fine with gaming not being accepted in the mainstream and being the passion of us nerds/geeks cause it means the industry would cater to us more and be more sustainable.
At one point in my life I considered modding a console of mine so I could save money through piracy but in the end I decided not to because I care about this medium and wanted to support the people working in it, for the same reason I don't tend to buy games used as it does not support the people making the content I enjoy. I'm not alone in this attitude but I'm not part of the majority of poeple playing games these days!
I find the whole piracy argument to be confusing. I actually read the previously mentioned article:
"We don't really like the 3DS, there's confusion and controversy around it, so we want to start back pedaling away from it, and YES Piracy is bad, that will be our excuse. "
I do agree that perception often trumps reality especially when humans are concerned. However, in the game case, the real problem is the economy. Many demographics that buy games have had their incomes curtailed or even eliminated, so those demographics buying much less than they used to. Are they pirating? Maybe, Maybe not. However, in the situation, does it really matter? I suppose if they only had games it might, but if you take their games away from them, they'll just read (aren't public libraries grand?), watch TV or do other things. My point is that since they have limited money they will not spend money on games. If that's the case then reducing piracy will not increase revenue. Which to me makes it a bad idea. Why spend resources when you're not likely to get a return on those resources? In fact you're likely to lose that small percentages that pirates and then buys. I guess that you can feel good that you showed those pirates. But feeling good is not really good business.
So yes I think its very good for a publisher to watch where they are putting their resources, but the economy will fix itself, and likely gamer's will recover eventually. And the thing is that when the economy recovers, publishers will be so confused it will be funny. Really what they should be doing is like everyone else, controlling costs and increasing market penetration. So if you're making 20% less for a item now, make sure that item's cost is down 20%.
He continues, "Publishers end up catering to that type of buyer instead of the enthusiast/hardcore players. This means that not only are gamers presented with more and more sports/licensed/sequel games in favor of original IP games, but also that even within non-original IP games, the type of design and gameplay will tend toward less innovative/risky mechanics."
Means, if the one who finances your games is an idiot, you have a problem.
That's not a problem with piracy, but with incompetent decision makers, that were responsible for a worldwide 20+% revenue drop in 2012.
From December 2004 to September 2012 917 million DS games were sold, if a publisher isn't able to do the math and see, that this more then 6 times the software sales of the original Gameboy and 3 times the software sales of the GBA, he should quit his job.
People who take risks (not having enough information ahead of time) and fail often called "idiots" and "incompetent" after the fact.
but exactly how were these people to blame for a worldwide 20+% revenue decline? I just don't see these logical dots connecting (and how any of this relates to this article)
seems to me the major point of the article is the "Thomas Theorem"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_theorem
"If men define situations as real they are real in their consequence"
or as Ong describes it:
"If publishers believe it to be the case, then it all falls down for the developers too."
Of all of these stats you are reporting:
How many of those 917 million were third party titles? (Yes, Mario sells well, but what about unique third party games)
How many were from smaller or mid tier developers? (I can only think of one "moderately successful" small company to spring forth from all these years (2004-2012) on the DS, 5th Cell (makers of Scribblenauts)... and they aren't "wildly successful" (no hits approaching the size of Minecraft, League of Legends, World of Tanks)
In general I disagree with your tone, assertions and analysis. (But you know what they say about opinions)
"People who take risks (not having enough information ahead of time) and fail often called "idiots" and "incompetent" after the fact.
but exactly how were these people to blame for a worldwide 20+% revenue decline?"
I call these people incompetent, because the NDS sold, as I wrote 6x the software of the original GB and 3x the software of the GBA. To bring up piracy as a reason your game doesn't sell, when in fact, software of other companies on the system is selling better then on every other handheld before is what I call idiotic.
This is directly connected to the 20% revenue drop and I can tell you exactly why.
Big publishers like EA ignored the DS in favour of the PSP from day one, this cost them a lot of revenue, but instead of fixing it, they continue to do it.
Last year, EA wasn't able to publish FIFA 13 on the NDS, while they made a PSP version, smart move eh?
And while they weren't able to port their latest NFS to the 3DS, they decided to do a Vita version, a handheld with an install base near Zero.
It doesn't need precog abilities to see, that this NFS won't sell and it doesn't need very much inside to understand why not publishing FIFA 13 for the NDS was a terrible decision.
""How many of those 917 million were third party titles? (Yes, Mario sells well, but what about unique third party games)""
Boring, how many times will this myths be repeated, I didn't searched long, so the first number I found was from 2010. Then the DS had 45 first party games selling more then 1 million copies and 63 third party games selling more then 1 million copies.
Source:http://www.ign.com/articles/2010/02/25/nintendo-boasts-thir d-party-sales-success
"How many were from smaller or mid tier developers?"
Since when is this of any interest, I don't many PS3/360 games from smaller or mid tier developers published in the last 5 years, that sold especially well.
But you don't seem to be overly familiar with Nintendo DS games, otherwise a company like Level 5 would spring to your mind, they really got big with their Nintendo DS games (Layton/Inazuma Eleven), Cooking Mama is another as Majesco isn't exactly what I would call one of the Big Guns, even Zoo Tycoon from THQ sold more then a million copies.
"seems to me the major point of the article is the "Thomas Theorem"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_theorem
"If men define situations as real they are real in their consequence" "
No, this is something completely different, if it were the Thomas Theorem, it would mean, if people believe that there is piracy on the 3DS, then it will have the consequences that piracy on the 3DS has. But that's not the case. Piracy has consequences on different levels not only on publisher/developer level, but also on consumer level and on hardware manufacturer level. These consequences don't become real, just because some incompetent managers running some publishers aren't able to use a pocket calculator.
"when in fact, software of other companies on the system is selling better then on every other handheld before is what I call idiotic."
-- who are these "other companies?" (do you mean Nintendo?).
So of all of these 917 million games over a 8 year period of time the best you could come up with was two "moderately successful" "mid tier titles"... I rest my case, mid tier development for Nintendo's consoles is a risky proposition. (That's all the article and publishers are saying)
Also, I'm confused....exactly what are you arguing?
1) Publishers are stupid FOR NOT taking the risk of developing for Nintendos mobile platform
-OR-
2) Publishers are stupid FOR taking the risk and developing for Nintendo's Mobile platform
...or something else (they are stupid in general or they are publishing games that are not good enough to sell well).
Also...
"This is directly connected to the 20% revenue drop and I can tell you exactly how Big publishers like EA ignored the DS in favour of the PSP, which cost them a lot of revenue and they continue to do it. Last year, EA wasn't able to publish FIFA 13 on the NDS, while they made a PSP version, smart move eh? And while they weren't able to port their latest NFS to the 3DS, they decided to do a Vita version, a handheld with an install base near Zero.
It doesn't need precog abilities to see, that this NFS won't sell and it doesn't need very much inside to understand why not publishing FIFA 13 for the NDS was a terrible decision."
-- This entire thing is speculation backed by no evidence ... Do you know how much it would have cost them to develop the game on NDS? what kind of precedent is there for how much sports games sell on Nintendo's mobile platforms? How much would/could they incurr as a recurring cost from offering online capabilities if the game is pirated by > 50% (I'm making this number up, but you get the drift)
... Business generally takes risks that they seem reasonable... but you are saying that you would know better than the analysts who work for EA and they are "leaving money on the table"... that's a real specious argument considering the folks there are driven to grow their brands and make money.
What are you talking about? In 2010 45 first party games sold over a million and 63 third party games. I didn't talked about 2 "moderately succesful" mid tier titles, where do you read such a thing? I talked about 3 series (Layton/Cooking Mama/Inazuma Eleven), from which every entry sold multiple million copies. Do you mind to tell me, where successfull begins for you?
And besides, compared to the PS3/360 every NDS game is small to mid tier development, when it comes to team size and production budget.
"... Business generally takes risks that they seem reasonable... but you are saying that you would know better than the analysts who work for EA and they are "leaving money on the table"... that's a real specious argument. "
It may skipped your attention, but it has been years, since EA reported a full year profit, the recent history of this company consists only of wrong decisions.
I'd like to see the source for that...
Wikipedia has a list of Million sellers dated March 31, 2011 which numbers 139 and almost all are Nintendo/first party titles, of the Non-Nintendo Titles there are many "Ports/remakes" ala Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, and not a single "Sports" game (except Mario themed one)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Nintendo_DS_vide o_games
but more specifically how many titles would you consider developed by "Mid-tier" developers with "new control schemes".
Let the public decide. I think the facts speak for themselves.
For what? For the 63 third party million sellers? I already gave it to you. Or for the fact, that every Layton/Cooking Mama/Inazuma Eleven game sold multiple millions of copies?
Layton:
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/17616-lifetime-unit-sales-for-profes sor-layton-gam
es-hit-12m-worldwide/
Cooking Mama:
http://www.destructoid.com/cooking-mama-gets-around-12-million-uni ts-worldwide-2
15342.phtml
Inazuma Eleven:
http://translate.google.de/translate?sl=ja&tl;=en&js;=n&prev;=_t&hl;=d e&ie;=UTF-8&eot;
f=1&u;=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.famitsu.com%2Fgame%2Fnews%2F1230557_1124.html∾ t=url
Wikipedia lists aren't exactly what I would call a good source... but while we are at it, the Wikipedia list of best selling PSP games doesn't feature many sports games either, except for Hot Shots Golf.
You completely loose me, what is the next question, how many mid-tier developers with new controls schemes, that have staff consisting 50% of women and that build cartridges from eco friendly materials?
here is the wikipedia list along with and who PUBLISHED the games: (and just for reference this article is called "piracy is a problem because PUBLISHERS say so")
(n) is nintendo
(n) New Super Mario Bros. (29.09 million)[2]
(n) Nintendogs (23.64 million)[3]
(n) Mario Kart DS (22.57 million)[2]
(n) Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day! (18.96 million)[3]
(n) Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (17.57 million)[4]
(n) Brain Age 2: More Training in Minutes a Day! (14.83 million)[3]
(n) Pokémon Black and White (14.71 million)[2]
(n) Pokémon HeartGold and SoulSilver (11.90 million)[5]
(n) Animal Crossing: Wild World (11.51 million)[3]
(n) Super Mario 64 DS (9.65 million)[5]
(n) Mario Party DS (8.21 million)[5]
(n) Pokémon Platinum (7.06 million)[6]
(n) (NorthAmerica) level5 (jp) Dragon Quest IX: Sentinels of the Starry Skies (5.31 million approximately; 4.29 million in Japan,[7] 1.02 million overseas)[5]
(n) Big Brain Academy (5.01 million)[8]
(n) Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Time and Explorers of Darkness (4.5 million)[9]
(n) Pokémon Black 2 and White 2 (4.26 million)[10]
(n) (Northa America) level5 (jp) Professor Layton and the Curious Village (4.17 million approximately; 1 million in Japan,[11] 3.17 million overseas)[6]
(n) Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story (4.13 million)[5]
(n) The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (4.13 million)[8]
(n) Professor Layton and the Diabolical Box (3.36 approximately; 928,089 in Japan,[12] 2.43 million overseas)[6]
(n) Tomodachi Collection (3.2 million)[13]
(n) Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Blue Rescue Team (3.08 million)[14]
(n) Yoshi's Island DS (2.91 million)[8]
(n) English Training: Have Fun Improving Your Skills! (2.86 million)[14]
(n) (NA) level-5 (JP) Professor Layton and the Unwound Future (2.833 million approximately; 862,967 in Japan,[12] 1.97 million overseas)[5]
taito/majesco Cooking Mama (2.827 million approximately: 1.2 million in US,[15] 1 million in Europe,[16] 62,660 in Japan)[17]
(n) Pokémon Ranger (2.7 million)[8]
(n) The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks (2.6 million)[13]
(n) Flash Focus: Vision Training in Minutes a Day (2.52 million)[8]
(n) Kirby Super Star Ultra (2.36 million)[9]
(n) WarioWare: Touched! (2.15 million)[14]
(n) Style Savvy (2.09 million)[6]
(n) Tetris DS (2.05 million)[14]
(n) Pokémon Ranger: Shadows of Almia (2.04 million)[9]
square Final Fantasy III (2 million approximately: 1.06 million in Japan,[18] 460,000 in North America,[19] and 480,000 in Europe)[20]
(n) Rhythm Heaven (1.92 million in Japan)[9]
(n) (NorthAmerica) level-5 (jp) Professor Layton and the Last Specter (1.91 million approximately; 659,504 in Japan,[12] 1.25 million overseas)[2]
(n) Art Academy (1.90 million)[5]
(n) Personal Trainer: Cooking (1.84 million)[9]
(n) Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Mini-Land Mayhem! (1.78 million)[5]
?? Common Sense Training (1.65 million in Japan)[18]
(n) Kirby: Squeak Squad (1.6 million)[21]
(n) Mario Hoops 3-on-3 (1.5 million)[14]
Square/Ubi/disney eidos Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days (1.49 million)[7]
(square) Dragon Quest Monsters: Joker (1.47 million in Japan)[18]
(square) Dragon Quest IV: Chapters of the Chosen (1.46 million approximately; 1.2 million in Japan,[20][22] 110,000 in North America, 150,000 in Europe)[22]
(n) Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Sky (1.4 million)[6]
red octane Guitar Hero: On Tour (1.4 million approximately; 1.1 million in US,[15] 200,000 in UK,[23] 100,000 in France)[24]
(n) Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time (1.39 million)[14]
square Dragon Quest V: Hand of the Heavenly Bride (1.35 million)[22]
sega(na) nitendo(jp) Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games (1.31 million approximately, 338,000 in US,[25] 600,000 in UK,[26] 376.632 in Japan)[17]
ea MySims (1.3 million approximately; 1 million in US,[15] 300,000 in UK)[23]
?? Hannah Montana (1.3 million in US)[15]
square Dragon Quest VI (1.29 million)[7]
square Dragon Quest Monsters: Joker 2 (1.25 million in Japan)[27]
(n) Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis (1.24 million)[14]
(n) Clubhouse Games (1.23 million approximately; 630,000 in Japan,[17] 600,000 in UK)[26]
buena vista games High School Musical: Makin' the Cut! (1.2 million in North America and Western Europe)[28]
(n) Super Princess Peach (1.15 million)[14]
sega? Love and Berry DS Collection (1.12 million in Japan)[29]
bandai/atari Tamagotchi Connection: Corner Shop (1.12 million in Japan)[18]
square Final Fantasy IV (1.09 million approximately; 610,000 in Japan,[20][22] 300,000 in North America and 180,000 in Europe)[22]
(n) Kirby Mass Attack (1.06 million)[2]
(n) Diddy Kong Racing DS (1.04 million)[14]
square Final Fantasy XII: Revenant Wings (1.04 million approximately: 540,000 in Japan, 220,000 in North America, 280,000 in Europe)[20]
thq/agatsuma Drawn to Life (1 million approximately)[30]
wb games/ konami Scribblenauts (1 million)[31]
(n) (eu) level-5 (jp) Inazuma Eleven 2 (1 million shipped)[32]
disney interactive Spectrobes (1 million shipped)[33]
to say this list isn't completely dominated by first party publishing is a farce... (and while it may not agree directly with your numbers, i'd argue that unless nintendo is directly involved with publishing your game on their mobile platform the chances for success are greatly diminished.
please feel free to reply with detailed numbers that prove otherwise.
Or a biased view of reality based on affective attachment to Nintendo.
Michael DeFazio, Also if we are going to use Wikipedia as a source let's go ahead and just use Vgchartz as well. LOL
at least there are sources referenced from the wikipedia article from company financial statements (where applicable), who knows where VGChartz gets there stuff from.
in brief:
I'm not asserting the numbers are exact, but generally speaking are you arguing that they are wildly wrong?
if so name for me some breakout hits from third party publishers on Nintendo's mobile platform for the years (2004-2012). (I'm not saying some aren't making some sort of profit, I'm arguing that publishers are not "idiots"by not trying to focus on Nintendo's mobile platform (between 2004-2012) because opportunities exist elsewhere (IPhone, Android, PC, Console, ...) especially when you look at where the bulk of the sales (between first party and third party publishing) go to.
I am aware of this Wikipedia list, but it seem you are not aware, this is a WIKIPEDIA list, nothing solid, nothing complete, nothing worth quoting?
I gave you a link to IGN, they quoted Nintendo, which were saying in 2010, that 63 3rd party games sold more then 1 million copies - your Wikipedia List doesn't list 63 3rd party games, so even if NO 3rd party game since 2010 sold more then 1 million copies, your list would be incomplete.
Note, that an awfull lot of the titles in your list don't list worldwide shipping numbers, but only Japan or on numbers combined to an undefined "overseas". This list you seem to base your argumentation on is useless.
But lets not be naive here, Give me some accredited source that lists names and numbers of title sales and we all will agree the top 20-30-50-100 whatever will be completely dominated by Nintendo Published titles, then chop out the ports of existing highly popular IP developed by Big Studios and you are left with only a few new IP from third party developers that would be considered successful. (And nothing close to the order of recent console or Mobile or PC "blockbusters")
.... If third parties WERE making money developing new IP on this platform, it would be (in your words) stupid to not continue to milk that cash cow, it is just not the case.
Here is another Gamasutra article which breaks down the issue further:
http://gamasutra.com/view/news/175795/Is_Nintendos_thirdparty_ecos ystem_really_i
n_danger.php#.UPCP0aJqnXo
I'm kinda amazed you continue to argue around this point (I'm not even talking about piracy)
Peace, I'm out.
Wikipedia is no source and I gave you IGN as a source two times already, but it seems you prefer Wikipedia, so I looked up some newer numbers and can give you a quote from the Nintendo Corporate Briefing from Oct 2010:
"As of the end of September this year, the number of Nintendo DS titles which had shipped more than a million units since their launches increased by one from first-party developers, which include Nintendo and the Pokémon Company, to come to a total of 46, and by 10 from third-party developers to equal 79. "
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/101029/05.html
Of course Nintendo wont state that it sucks to be a third party for their platforms (let alone being an indie) while it's public knowledge since the game cube.
edit: typos
Sure, we can also believe Nintendo is lying to their investors, if this is the case, we should clearly rely more on Wikipedia lists, then on corporate briefings...
Then I guess you can tell me, where your profound facts come from, oh I forgot it's "public knowledge", very reliable.
http://www.vgchartz.com/article/87283/will-nintendo-ever-get-third -party-support
-right/
THQ:
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/07/18/more-thq-stockholders-suing-thq- over-udraw/
Besides, this is an opinion piece, how do you extract numbers from this? And even this OPINION PIECE says:
"In all of this, Nintendo's handheld platforms have not seen any sort of problem in third party support."
It's the old tree-in-the-forest story: if a third-party publishers sells a million units but nobody is told about it, did it happen?
I can say for sure there are more cracked Wii on the market then PS3 or Xbox 360. Publishers are just being stupid, and try to find excuses, that's all.
Funding something that looks cool but is unproven in the market is risky, especially when physical distribution in part of the equation. Large publishers, whether judged short-sighted or not by some, will make many of their decisions based on the accounting.
Figuratively speaking, everything changes when it is your money on the line.
Of course, if that kind of thinking were the be-all end-all of game development calls these past several years we would have been out an awful lot of sweet games. Thus, let us thank all our Kami-samas for digital distribution and self-publishing...and, I guess, crowdfunding(?)!
I'm guessing this post relates casual gamers to Wii owners, and core gamers to other game consoles even if not on purpose, but I can just say that in my experience dealing with people if I learn of an exploit hack or crack, it usually comes from a tech savvy kid from the age groups of 14 to 20 something. It doesn't matter if its a device, computer, console, or whatever. I believe the knowledge of these things gravitate around sites most kids and young adults of this age group frequent or socially correspond in. Even if the information comes from a hacker that is the age of 20 or above, its mostly aimed at tech savvy kids and young adults of college age. I conclude that the age group has the most time on there hands to figure this stuff out is the ones doing it the most. Hacking is not a plug an play affair much of the time so no time to figure it out = people who do not do it.
I own about 20 of them, many of which I bought after finishing them with my Flash Card. I would like to buy the remaining that I've played, but there are some issues. I won't buy them used. For one, I'm particular about the quality of my collection, and two, it's effectively and economically equal to piracy for developers/publishers. Then, There are the serious cash requirements. Most of the games I want to pick up are still in the $20-30 range. If I were to buy 100 DS games, this is 2 to 3 thousand dollars. Some games, like Radiant Historia and Okamiden are in the $70 range. Neither of these games are exactly classics - both were released in early 2011.
My failing effort to pay for all the games I've played is a symptom of something larger than "I wanna play games for free".
One of the most basic tenants of economics is that rarity = value. The more rare something is, the more value it has. The inverse is true, and closer to the problem, which is that the less rare something is, the less value it has.
We live in a world of virtually limitless entertainment options. I don't think it's possible to play every play-worthy game on Xbox, PS3, PC, and the handhelds that come out each month. And then, there's the music, the movies, the tv shows, the books, and all the other stuff people pirate. Each unit of Entertainment (one game, one movie, etc) doesn't have much value due to how saturated the market is with other units of entertainment. At least, each unit doesn't have as much value as the market assumes they do. There are some outliers, like the COD games, whose price point clearly matches the market's desire to pay, but there are far more games that just don't, particularly on consoles. Subjectively, I would argue that Ghost Trick is more valuable than COD on many levels (intriguing and unique game design, great narrative, amazing art, etc), just not on the economic level. The sad truth is that most gamers aren't as interested in a game like Ghost Trick, 999, Devil Survivor, or Nostalgia, as they are in Halo, Assassin's Creed, and COD. It's not to say the latter games aren't good games, but they're in demand enough that the price point can be justified.
Most people I know that pirate don't spend that much time with each thing they pirate. They treat all the new entertainment as sort of a buffet. Why has Netflix gotten so popular with their streaming? Because there are so many movies and tv shows that are available, that no one wants to buy a season of Bob's Burgers just to find out if they like it or not. Since Netflix, my pirating of tv and movies has plummeted to near zero. I'm happy paying my $10/month and explore media without a huge amount of risk.
Risk is a huge factor in piracy. We can all tell tales of that game that was going to be awesome, we bought it on launch day, and it just wasn't that good. Or what about those games that really are good, you bought, and just never got around to playing? I have stacks of $60 purchases that I could get new for $20 now. What's worse, the games you wanted to get and never did because you knew you just didn't have the time - but you're really missing out on an amazing under-the-radar game that as a game designer, you know you should play through and analyze. And then there are those games you just don't know about, because they're not popular - they could be good, or they could be bad. There could be a couple nuggets of game design genius hidden inside, or they could be pure genius, but you just don't know if its for you. 999 was an amazing game, but it's hard to tell if you'd like it or not based on someone else's opinion. $35 dollars is a good chunk of money to play something for 20 minutes and forever put back on your shelf. Buying a game is like an investment. When there's too much risk, you naturally avoid it.
So really, for me, it comes down to Risk and Cost. I've been burned so much that I'm not as daring, and I don't have money ready to be thrown to the streets. Is there much of a difference between spending that 2 grand on DS games vs dropping it in slot machines in hopes of a great return?
Right now, there are three near-similar trends in game development that have been on a massive rise in the last 3 years or so: Freemium, Mobile, and Indie Games. Both tend to be low cost ($1 to $15), and neither have massive risk. Are Faster than Light or To the Moon good? Spend $5 (less than lunch) on it during a Steam sale and find out. Is Angry Birds fun? Play a free version with ads. Is the Secret World a fun MMO? Play it, it's now a Fremium game now. Does Planetside 2 compare to other FPS games? Just install it. Low cost, low risk, near buffet style gaming.
Piracy isn't a cause of poor industry economics. It's a symptom. It's a market force. Rather than working so hard to attack it as if it were a cause, developers and publishers of media need to recognize it as any other form of competition. They need to understand why people pirate, and they need to make legal routes that work. Netflix is a great example of this.
Economic flow is similar to lightning: it takes the path of least resistance.
If someone did the same for games, I would be thrilled to sign up.
Cough Gametap cough
You summed up the major point I was making nicely. Netflix is low risk and low cost, as well as being a path of lesser resistance vs piracy. That's exactly what the gaming industry needs.
@A W:
Some of these methods of game delivery already exist. We have Gametap and Gamefly, but unfortunately, both services are lacking. Gametap lacks a decent library, and Gamefly has slow shipping and long queues. I'm partial to Steam and Gog.com, as they've both got great libraries and great prices, but they're still not quite there.
Not only do we need a better system for delivering games, but that system needs to be well executed.
There are also some other complications that are unique to games. They are often large in file size or requires heavy processing to run, and have to be lag-free. Players also like to collect game saves. Games also have to be accessible on demand.
A purely digital / streaming solution doesn't really work out for these issues all the time.
Amazon's Audible has a subscription method where you pay like $15/mo and you get one DRM-free audio book, and then any audio book you buy while a member is heavily reduced in price. I'm not sure this is a viable solution for games, but it might be worth it to draw inspiration from this system.
There may be other solutions, and some solutions like Steam have already helped a great deal, but we still have to make some more progress to cut down on piracy.
Personally, I feel that the best way to combat piracy is to just reduce the price of the goods.
Economists use the term 'market equilibrium' to define the exact point where supply crosses demand. Market equilibrium is the intersection of the highest price at which the consumer is comfortable spending and the lowest price the producer is comfortable selling. Right now, I believe that the current retail price is well above market equilibrium.
At first, it seems that the producer benefits greatly from a price above ME since they're selling their goods for more, but the negative side of that is that a black market is formed. A black market formed in the media industry manifests as bootlegging and piracy. The consumer just isn't as comfortable, on average, paying the higher prices and so they seek alternatives. Some are fine with the inflated price, and others aren't. The further from ME, the more skewed that ratio becomes towards the black market.
It would also seem that if the price was below market equilibrium, that it's beneficial to the consumer, but this isn't true either. If the producer is not able to make more money than they spend, they can no longer produce, and the consumer has nothing to consume.
It's the role of the producer to set the price as close to what they believe market equilibrium is. The closer to the ME they can get, the higher the profit.
The used games market is huge right now, and that's a reflection of the inflated price. Consumers are much more comfortable paying the used price, not because it's lower, but because it's closer to the ME. They're willing to buy games with scratches, stickers attached, missing or damaged manuals, and generic boxes, just to pay closer to what they feel is fair. Sure, if new games were $20 and used ones were $10, you'd still have people buying the used games, but not as many as there are now.
Unfortunately, the 'mainsteam' entertainment industries seem to disagree entirely, and instead of trying to compete with piracy, theyre trying to pass bills like SOPA/PIPA/ACTA and other draconian network spying practices, and working on getting new generations of consoles to reject used copies of games. They're trying to attack their own consumers. This practice has never worked out long term for any producer of any good in the past. Vader-grip monopolies and market manipulation just doesn't work for industries that produce goods that aren't vital to sustaining life, because the consumer becomes the new producer - something we can partially claim to the success of indie games in recent years.
Steam and other digital distribution companies and the independents are making it harder and harder for the big guys to hold on to that dream, so they're panicking.
I'm sorry, but I've heard publishers use this exact excuse for so many things other than piracy that I can't take it seriously at all.
It seems there's a strong case for the publishers being RIGHT in this instance.
Piracy IS a huge problem in the territories this article mentioned. Publishers should just pretend it's not for the sake of your original IP?
Then go ahead and invest your own money in game development on piracy ridden systems.
The article linked by this one has someone blaming piracy for a 50% loss of sales, but he has no stats on piracy of his product, nor did the effects of piracy change on that platform during that loss (his first and second game came out both while the R4 cart was popular, which doesn't explain why he doesn't cite piracy as an issue for the first game, or why sales declined between versions). He's not bringing anything to the table, he's scapegoating for the shortcomings of the project. Similarly the RIAA and MPAA and some Game organizations are pointing at piracy as a major issue, but on the flip side, you have new distribution services (Netflix, iTunes, Steam) making record profits year-on-year in those exact same areas. Piracy is affecting different companies and different models at different rates, and instead of adapting and providing services on par with Apple or Valve, some people would rather muzzle some of the major benefits of the internet and use pirates as they would patents (as a form of legal bullying and another revenue stream, by suing for exorbitant sums).
People are not being attacked for speaking out against piracy, but they will be called out for using it as a scapegoat (since it's a VERY hard to pin down loss of sales value, you can estimate it as 1%-100% lost sales making for a good unprovable scapegoat), and will blame piracy first, before looking internally and at the competition that is successful in spite of piracy.
Maybe once we can get Shoplifting down to 0% we can start to think about how to actually stop piracy. Until then we need to be thinking of alternative forms of business, not extensive, muzzling legislation and technological lockouts.
Edit: I should add that I do not agree with piracy, and do not do it. I am 100% against piracy and give colleagues and friends crap about pirating. But I agree even less with the current lobbying going on, the increased closure of services and devices to attempt to curb piracy, since it involves destroying a lot of great potential capabilities at the cost of a few delinquents, like adding mandatory strip searches at a checkout to curb shoplifting. We need to attack 'piracy as a scapegoat' and 'blame piracy instead of adapting to the digital culture of immediacy', because if no-one speaks up about it, we are going to end up 'cutting off the hand to save the finger' so to speak.
Saying piracy is bad is ok in my book. Saying piracy is the reason we gotta make shitty sequels, sport games and shut down original IP then someone is bound to get pissed. Considering those 3 things are some of the biggest criticisms thrown at the industry.
At one point in my life I considered modding a console of mine so I could save money through piracy but in the end I decided not to because I care about this medium and wanted to support the people working in it, for the same reason I don't tend to buy games used as it does not support the people making the content I enjoy. I'm not alone in this attitude but I'm not part of the majority of poeple playing games these days!
"We don't really like the 3DS, there's confusion and controversy around it, so we want to start back pedaling away from it, and YES Piracy is bad, that will be our excuse. "
I do agree that perception often trumps reality especially when humans are concerned. However, in the game case, the real problem is the economy. Many demographics that buy games have had their incomes curtailed or even eliminated, so those demographics buying much less than they used to. Are they pirating? Maybe, Maybe not. However, in the situation, does it really matter? I suppose if they only had games it might, but if you take their games away from them, they'll just read (aren't public libraries grand?), watch TV or do other things. My point is that since they have limited money they will not spend money on games. If that's the case then reducing piracy will not increase revenue. Which to me makes it a bad idea. Why spend resources when you're not likely to get a return on those resources? In fact you're likely to lose that small percentages that pirates and then buys. I guess that you can feel good that you showed those pirates. But feeling good is not really good business.
So yes I think its very good for a publisher to watch where they are putting their resources, but the economy will fix itself, and likely gamer's will recover eventually. And the thing is that when the economy recovers, publishers will be so confused it will be funny. Really what they should be doing is like everyone else, controlling costs and increasing market penetration. So if you're making 20% less for a item now, make sure that item's cost is down 20%.