A little over a week ago, some troubling NPD numbers were leaked and caught by our intrepid news staffer Lukasz Balicki. The NPD Group provides market research on consumer products, and is best known to gamers for providing sales figures for video games. While their system is imperfect, it does provide a reasonable basis for judging a game's retail success.

Lukasz sent the following numbers to the Nintendo World Report staff on October 20th, 2009:

• Spyborgs - 500
• Dead Space Extraction - 9,000
• Muramasa: The Demon Blade - 36,000
• Gran Turismo PSP - 18,000
• Soul Calibur: Broken Destiny 26,000

All of these titles were recent releases (all came out in the previous month), and none of these numbers would be regarded as major successes, but some numbers aren't that bad. The most shocking is obviously Spyborgs, which was released September 22nd. The number 500 represents the NPD estimation for national sales of Spyborgs, which seems to be backed up by the almost instantaneous price cut the game received.

Despite overall positive impressions, Spyborg's retail failure sparked discussion among the NWR staff.

Zach Miller

Wow. No wonder Spyborgs dropped in price so quick. Let's TRY to sell a few more copies, Capcom! Although, to be honest, they didn't market SHIT for that game.

Dead Space is a nice surprise.

Pedro Hernandez

Yes, Capcom barely bothered to market the game save for a few online videos and such.

Glad that Muramasa did so well.

Spyborgs in action: Yep, fires.

Jon Lindemann

Is that five-hundred copies?

Lukasz Balicki

Yes.

Jon Lindemann

Holy crap, how is that even possible? That's gotta be one of the biggest flops ever released.

HOPEFULLY IT HAS A LONG TAIL

Zach Miller

I might actually pick it up at its current dirt-cheap price. I liked the core gameplay and enemy design at E3.

Jon Lindemann

It's not a bad game at all. A bit repetitive and unoriginal, but you can say that about 85% of the Wii's game library anyways.

Zach Miller

KABOOM

*Editor's Note: Zach linked to Spyborg's listing on the website of a major retailer. It lists the price as "$18.92, was $39.92." The link is not included here for journalistic reasons as well as the fact the link will eventually become invalid.

Jon Lindemann

Confirmation of the Dead Space numbers. (via: edge-online)

Lukasz Balicki

Publishers need to advertise their stuff period.

James Jones

Now I just feel bad for the people that worked on it. Capcom basically left them out to dry by doing NOTHING for the game. I forgot it even existed; I didn't know it was out until I saw it at the store, and by then it was already 20 bucks.

500 copies is terrible, I bet Red-Neck Jamboree sold more copies. I know that even CHICKEN SHOOT sold more copies!

Chicken Shot.

Jon Lindemann

Usually I think analysts are full of shit, but Jesse Divnich is right on target here:

"the success or failure of a Wii title usually correlates directly to marketing spend."

I always thought this was B.S., but I now realize it's 100% true. Games on the 360/PS3 can survive with minimal marketing spend, because the audiences of those consoles (typically) actively follow the industry and know when games are coming out. In other words, they don't necessarily need to be marketed to; the games that are targeted at them don't absolutely require extra exposure unless they're a me-too title like Bionic Commando, or something like Borderlands that gets lost in the shuffle amidst other huge releases. The purpose of marketing on these consoles usually isn't to SELL copies, but rather to SELL MORE copies. That's a huge difference.

There's a slew of fairly quality Wii games that haven't made so much as a ripple at retail because there has been no marketing given to them whatsoever. Excitebots, Spyborgs, Dead Space Extraction, MadWorld...they all disappeared shortly after release because the Wii audience at large didn't know about them, and they are now left to move units via the bargain bin.

Another very telling quote from Divnich:

"Most games have a 12 to 24 month development schedule and over a year ago the industry was under the assumption that mature-rated games could succeed on the Wii. Unfortunately, as we progressed and witnessed the sales results from games such as MadWorld, it became pretty clear the market size for games with mature-content was extremely small, much smaller than any other home platform. The truth is most core gamers who gravitate towards mature content likely own more than just a Wii."

This is also 100% true. If I own a Wii and a 360/PS3 and can buy Dead Space, why on earth would I even bother with Dead Space Extraction (unless I'm a raging Dead Space fanboy who must have every game in the franchise)? If I can buy CoD4: Modern Warfare, why would I even bother with The Conduit? I could go on and on. Nobody is going to buy a mature title on Wii if they can get a better-looking version - with the addition of kick-ass online play, in most cases - of a similar game on 360/PS3. It's just not gonna happen.

The Wii is basically the GameCube, sad to say. Third-parties don't care about it, top-quality mature games don't come out on the platform, and Nintendo is pretty much the only one making high-quality innovative games for it. Thus, they earn the lion's share of the profits on the platform. The only difference this time around is that they struck gold with Wii Sports and Wii Fit, and tapped the market beyond the die-hard Nintendo fanboys and old-school Nintendo fans.

Lukasz Balicki

Well Lindy, that rule is for any game period. Why do you think most DS or PSP games don't get a lot of sales? There are many games released for both platforms (well PSP is sort of dying out but whatever), but so many games on the DS get released at any given time that many of them get lost in the shuffle. This is also true for console games. I found that one of the best forms of advertising a game can get is word of mouth, since people tend to trust their peers more than a generic ad. But word of mouth doesn't work if they didn't know when a game came out. Hell Atlus recently send out e-mails that Demon's Souls sold out and is a huge financial success so they are making more copies, however they had to discontinue the deluxe edition and Atlus stuff is usually very niche (most of their sales targets are 25,000 - 100,000 copies max).

I think this is why publishers are spacing out releases more, so that they can advertise each game properly or give them a longer shelf life. But unfortunately publishers sometimes think that a game will sell itself, which is true for big prominent brands, but there are always exceptions to the rule such as Bionic Commando.

Retail games tend to have a short shelf life unless publishers create follow-up ads or introduce a lower price point but we probably know that by now. In my opinion the shelf life of games this generation is much shorter due to how fast game prices are dropping, since many people can't afford to always buy $60 dollar games on release day or so, and how frequently publishers are creating sequels for stuff like Guitar Hero (you can find GH: Aerosmith for $9.99 NEW).

Kids, this is the face of years of drugs.

Jon Lindemann

I'll admit it's a circular argument, but mature games have never proven that they will sell on Wii, so companies won't drop marketing dollars on them. This virtually ensures their failure, but in terms of marketing bang for buck, I can see where companies are coming from. Nobody's going to buy the game anyways, why risk dropping marketing money on it? The Conduit had great word-of-mouth and High Voltage worked their asses off campaigning for it at a grass-roots level, and its sales were still mediocre.

The entire concept of Wii is tilted in Nintendo's favor, and third-parties know it. Nintendo has done, and always will do, what's good for Nintendo. Yet everybody scratches their heads and wonders why third-parties aren't fans of the company or its consoles any more.

Neal Ronaghan

It's weird because some developers, usually smaller ones, are crazy loyal to Nintendo. Both Gaijin Games and Big John Games were like "Nintendo's been good to us, so we focus on making Wii or DS games." Although maybe Nintendo supports these smaller WiiWare/DSiWare developers with some care.

Jon Lindemann

I always look at stuff like that as, "What's in it for Nintendo?" (that's a cynical view I know, but after observing Nintendo for more than a decade I can verify that they're one of the least altruistic companies out there). My only guess is that they probably see themselves making more money off of these small games on WiiWare/DSiWare than off of third-party games, since there's no middle-man involved and they can charge whatever they want since they control the means of distribution.

Lukasz Balicki

Well yeah Nintendo is the only major company out of the three that's very lenient on requirements and allow companies to self-publish on WiiWare and DSiWare.

Jon Lindemann

'cause it makes them that scrilla scrilla, dolla dolla bill y'all

Neal Ronaghan

I was thinking, maybe we should make the video game sales equivalent of baseball's Mendoza Line (link).

I present to you, the Spyborgs Line, known as the GRIN Line on Xbox 360 and PS3.

Example 1: Thank god Excitekite passed the Spyborgs line. Hopefully it will cross 1,000 copies sold.

Example 2: Looks like Black College Football Experience: The Doug Williams Edition was just shy of the GRIN Line.

James Jones

I don't think MadWorld is a fair example. It simply wasn't a top-quality game. They didn't even bother with 480p. You could say the same about 8.5 (Editor: a.k.a. The Conduit, which Jon Lindemann gave an 8.5 in his review). That game lacked polish and didn't really try much new.

I would argue that neither were marketed well, MadWorld less so. A mature game could work on Wii if the experience is both top shelf and uniquely compelling (in a good way).

The challenge is to make the quality and "innovation" public knowledge, especially among traditional gamers.

Andy Goergen

As for the people who argue that money/resources are not put into Wii 3rd party games, I hope they took a look at Dead Space Extraction, which from my reading and podcast listening has been received very well by the same folks who deride Wii games on a regular basis. The game appears to be a high quality, well-produced game with great visuals. It's STILL not selling.

Dead Space Extraction: Sales not included

I don't think Halo 3 would sell if it was perfectly recreated on Wii (minus the inherent platform restrictions). It's just not the ideal platform for that kind of content.

James Jones

Andy, what does Dead Space Extraction do that's actually unique? It's a rail-shooter on a system awash in rail-shooters.

Neal Ronaghan

James, I disagree. I think we're reaching a point where it is safe to say that a mature game that does those things won't work on the Wii. I think the only Mature-rated games that have been successes are Resident Evil games.

Lukasz Balicki

Actually, M-Rated games do sell well if the company supports it.

Call Of Duty: World At War sold more than a million on Wii (sold slow at first, until Activision got their shit together and advertised the hell out of it). RE:4 Wii Edition sold really well, Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicles sold more than a million.

Neal Ronaghan

Well that's exactly my point. Unique, Mature-rated games have proven that they can't sell on the Wii.

Only Resident Evil and Call of Duty can.

With a sexy man like this on the cover, how could the ladies resist Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles?

Lukasz Balicki

They can if publishers actually give a damn and support it well.

James Jones

I can't think of a mature title that has checked all those boxes.

At the same time, we need to define mature. It can't simply be a Miller Test. You can't have this discussion without a standard.

Lukasz Balicki

Unfortunately most people call a mature game, mature just because it has the big rated M sticker on the box.

Neal Ronaghan

That's why I'm specifying Mature-rated games and not mature games.

But still, Sega tried with MadWorld, which is an admittedly niche title, and that didn't work out too well. Dead Space: Extraction is promising to be a sales failure. Both featured support from their publishers, obviously focusing in on the ideal markets (i.e. gaming sites).

James, I don't think a game that checked off all those boxes would sell well on the Wii. On the 360/PS3, yes, but not on the Wii. The kind of Mature-rated games that sell on the Wii are based off of proven existing franchises.

James Jones

I feel like the only way to know is to see it happen.

Lukasz Balicki

Why should they focus just on the gaming-centric sites? If they put some TV ads on popular TV stations they will get more awareness.

Neal Ronaghan

I feel like any dime-store analyst or public relations rep will say it won't happen. Sales trends don't make that risk look worthwhile. Also, that's an extremely idealistic game you're talking about. A lot of time and money would have to go into it, and then it still might miss the mark.

On the other hand, sales trends would probably sway companies to make Mature-rated games on other systems because they sell. The fact that the market is flooded with those games is another story.

James, I know it pains you, as it does me, that Disaster isn't out in North America, but why do you think it isn't? Probably because Nintendo thought it would be dead on arrival. Honestly, they'd be right.

James Jones

And Disaster isn't good, even if it pains me to admit that.

Disaster Day of Crisis: Hurricane? Check. Terrorists? Check. Edges so sharp you could cut yourself on a taxi? What's not to love?

Andy Goergen

Question: If Square Enix put out a mainline Final Fantasy title on Wii, do you think it would sell better than it would sell on PS3/360? I ask because Square has supported the Wii and DS very well with much success, but they've never put their big dog (well, one of their two big dogs) on the consoles. I suppose we'll get some indication when DQX comes out, but that's more of a Japanese experiment than FF (I'm under the impression that the NA market prefers FF and the Japanese market prefers DQ).

Lukasz Balicki

Yes, especially in Japan since there are more Wiis in Japan when compared to PS3 and 360 combined. Why do you think Dragon Quest X will be on Wii? Or why do you think Monster Hunter Tri was moved from PS3 to Wii?

Andy Goergen

Well that's why I specifically asked about Final Fantasy - I'm thinking that's always been a larger draw in North America.

Monster Hunter Tri and DQ X are both examples where games that sell great in Japan were moved to the console with the strongest install base. I'm curious if you think that there's any genre or franchise that sells great in North America that would replicate this success.

When Monster Hunter Tri came out in Japan, their National Productivity came to a screeching halt.

Lukasz Balicki

Well here is the thing Andy, Nintendo pledged to help market those two titles overseas to make them more popular. Nintendo has the whole Dragon Quest license on the Wii and DS and now Monster Hunter on Wii.

Zach Miller

It really disappoints me that Dead Space Extraction isn't doing better. Like I said in my review, it's top-shelf horror with great gameplay to back it up. And EA has been doing a valiant job of advertising it in print and on websites. I think that just means that MOST people with a Wii just don't care about "mature" titles. Meanwhile, Wii Fit is the 3rd-best-selling game of the decade.

Lukasz Balicki

Well Zach, sales may get a bump during the holiday season, when people spend the most on games.

Neal Ronaghan

I don't think EA is planning on that.

Andy Goergen

Sure, and those games might sell well in the US, but that's still not what I'm trying to get at. Are there any 3rd-party franchises or genres that are very popular in the US that have been on competing platforms in the past, but if moved to Wii/DS would actually do BETTER than they would on their former platform? Because if they won't do better, what reason is there to drop production on the PS3/360 version and switch gears, aside from development cost I suppose? There are certainly costs involved in switching gears to a new platform which might offset the difference in developing between 360 and Wii, however.

Neal Ronaghan

Mainline Final Fantasy games will eternally be on the most graphically powerful consoles as long as Square Enix has their way.

Jon Lindemann

It's also hard to put new games in existing franchises on Wii without making it look like a step backward for the franchise. Part of RE4's appeal was its amazing graphics. On the Wii, RE5 would have looked almost exactly like RE4. What's the point in that? Fans of the franchise want to up the ante from a visual standpoint, so RE5 went to 360/PS3 and was a massive hit. Much more of a hit than it would have been on Wii, I'm sure.

Andy Goergen

I agree 100%, but they're doing it with Dragon Quest. Presumably that's because the Japanese market doesn't care.

Jon Lindemann

And the immersion factor in DQ X isn't 100% dependent on highly realistic/detailed graphics, either.

Andy Goergen

Very true. You don't need HD graphics to spend 30 hours leveling up.

Jon Lindemann

Nintendo willingly backed themselves into a corner by not giving the Wii much more visual horsepower than GameCube. Yes, they made it cheaper to develop for their system, but they also guaranteed that any developer accustomed to creating games with cutting-edge graphics would pretty much ignore the Wii, or at most assign a B-team to any game made for the console. In general, I'd say video game developers (ESPECIALLY the top-tier developers like Konami, Bioware, Capcom, etc.) want to make their games using the newest technology, not technology from 2001. The result? Outside of Nintendo's own development teams, the best of the best developers in the industry are NOT developing on Wii, because they want to make the best game they can make on the best hardware out there. Developers aren't robots or outsourced labor; they want to be challenged, and in the console realm the Wii's hardware is old news, freaky-deeky control scheme or not.

But again, Nintendo does what's best for Nintendo, and Nintendo was tired of sinking more and more money into game development. All of the "we can't do anything more with graphics, it's all about gameplay now" is smoke'n'mirrors and PR to a large degree. Nintendo just wanted higher return on investment, so they fixed one of the variables in the development cost equation.

Pedro Hernandez

As a reply to the issue of sales, I think its unfair to blame Nintendo or the company for a game's failure.

Yes, many of these games could have used more advertising on TV, print, newspapers and such. But many of these games DID receive a lot of help and support from Nintendo, and they did their best to advertise their games through many mediums. If the game didn't sell, it didn't sell. Just because the Wii is the number one console in the world it doesn't mean that any game that lands on it will become an instant million-seller.

Consumers are a finicky bunch. Just when you have them figured out, them don't buy your game. Just when you think no one will pay attention to it, they buy it in the droves. Again, it can be hard to determine what your consumer wants, especially in this rough financial climate. Hell, even when your fans say they will support you, they just plain don't. And not even a winning game can capture the people's attention. The only guaranteed way that a game WILL sell is if its based on a beloved franchise (like Mario, the Wii series, Halo, etc.), something that consumers are familiar with.

So again, I wouldn't place the blame solely on Nintendo and the company that made the game. While more advertising does mean more consumer awareness of the product it doesn't always guarantee success unless its based on an established franchise, or the product has generated lots of hype before release (and even then, that doesn't always work).

Jon Lindemann

But Nintendo does bear the brunt of the blame in creating a console that doesn't...let's say..."serve the interests" of most third-party developers. You can't have it both ways, and Nintendo chose to do what worked for them and them alone. They weren't saving the industry with the Wii, no matter how they tried to spin it; they were saving their own ass. Right now the Wii's 50 million+ userbase is, for many companies, one in which about 49,750,000 people will never even think about touching their game, because all they care about is Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and whatever derivatives Nintendo can spin off of them. Good for Nintendo, not so good for everybody else.

I think we can agree that no marketing is always bad for a game, but it's chicken-and-egg like I said. Taking the above into consideration, I can't blame companies for just tossing Wii games out there with no support, since it truthfully probably wouldn't matter anyways. Unless it's Mario Whatever, Wii Whatever, or something like EA Sports Active or Deca Sports, it's just not going to move big units.

Deca Sports scored a major goal for Hudson. Get it? Get it?

What do you think? Do you agree or disagree? Be sure to make your thoughts known in our forums!