• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PS5 sales surge over 300% in the UK during February (compared to Feb '22) | UK Monthly Charts

Sony only announces milestone sales marks and that's why they didn't announce The Last of Us Part II sales.

Last of Us Remastered was bundled for years. It was evident that bundles play a large part in The Last of Us Remaster bundles because Last of Us Part II beat it in revenue in the US in less than 3 weeks and the same goes for Uncharted 4.

As I mentioned earlier. Uncharted 4 bundled accounted for more than 3 million "copies" sold in the US and the game reportedly sold just over 8 million in less than a year. So, that means Uncharted 4 sold "more units" than Last of Us Part II in a shorter period of time, but made far less revenue.


Sony knows this. Do you think they're happier with Last of Us Remastered selling 13 million copies or Last of Us Part II selling 4 million copies in 3 days but making more revenue in return?

I mean the remaster started at 50 dollars and dropped to 35 dollars within 3 months.

So not surprised to see a game that launched for 60+ out due it in revenue fairily quickly.

Where are you getting less revenue for Uncharted 4?

That's kind of a red herring. One game is a remaster that probably cost little to nothing to make whereas the other game took over 5 years of development and probably cost over 100 million dollars to make... So please continue to compare apples and oranges here.
 

Dr. Claus

Vincit qui se vincit
Yeah the narrative that only exists on gaf and YouTube

Sure Jan GIF


You keep tellin' yourself that, Kiddo.
 

DForce

Member
I mean the remaster started at 50 dollars and dropped to 35 dollars within 3 months.

So not surprised to see a game that launched for 60+ out due it in revenue fairily quickly.

Where are you getting less revenue for Uncharted 4?
Lifetime dollar sales were 3rd highest for a Sony Published game in US History.

That's more than Uncharted 4, Last of Us, Days Gone, and Horizon Zero Dawn.

It was behind Horizon Zero Dawn in the first month and then moved to second 3rd place after July.
TLOU.jpg


Uncharted 4 bundles were sold at MSRP and they didn't make any revenue (outside of multiplayer purchases of course) so those bundles sold were basically free.


It sold 8.7 million copies in less than a year. This was likely on pace to outsell Last of Us Part II in units sold.

Leading up to that announcement, we see this.
NPD 2016 September
Only one SKU launched: PS4 Slim 500GB Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End, and for the month it was the third best-selling hardware SKU

NPD 2016 October
The PS4 Slim 500 GB Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End bundle was the month’s best-selling hardware across the category, accounting for 17 percent of total hardware units sold in the month

NPD 2016 November
“The PlayStation 4 was the top-selling hardware system in the month, driven by the PS4 Slim System 500GB Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End Bundle,” said Naji. “This SKU accounted for 30 percent of all hardware units sold.

NPD 2016 December
The PlayStation 4 was the top-selling console of the month, with the PlayStation 4 Slim System 500GB Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End Bundle performing the best.


That's kind of a red herring. One game is a remaster that probably cost little to nothing to make whereas the other game took over 5 years of development and probably cost over 100 million dollars to make... So please continue to compare apples and oranges here.

You clearly missed the point. lol

fl6kuia7nhz21.jpg


Last of Us sold over 12 million copies on PS4
Uncharted 4 sold over 16 million on PS4

Despite selling more units, The Last of Us Part II sold more.


So now we go back to your statement.

TLOU was their best-selling PS3 game aside from GT5. The remaster sold even more than the original. They fully expected the sequel to sell more than 10 million copies after the remaster sold that much with fewer consoles to sell to and after Uncharted 4 reached new heights for PS4 games.

Most of the game sales were likely due to bundles and they made very little revenue from it, so bringing up the fact that it sold more than the original doesn't mean much considering it made far less money than the PS3 release and The Last of Us Part II in less than two weeks.



Ths is why people shouldn't focus on the number of copies sold, but how it actually reached that number.
 
Lifetime dollar sales were 3rd highest for a Sony Published game in US History.

That's more than Uncharted 4, Last of Us, Days Gone, and Horizon Zero Dawn.

It was behind Horizon Zero Dawn in the first month and then moved to second 3rd place after July.
TLOU.jpg


Uncharted 4 bundles were sold at MSRP and they didn't make any revenue (outside of multiplayer purchases of course) so those bundles sold were basically free.


It sold 8.7 million copies in less than a year. This was likely on pace to outsell Last of Us Part II in units sold.

Leading up to that announcement, we see this.





You clearly missed the point. lol

fl6kuia7nhz21.jpg


Last of Us sold over 12 million copies on PS4
Uncharted 4 sold over 16 million on PS4

Despite selling more units, The Last of Us Part II sold more.


So now we go back to your statement.



Most of the game sales were likely due to bundles and they made very little revenue from it, so bringing up the fact that it sold more than the original doesn't mean much considering it made far less money than the PS3 release and The Last of Us Part II in less than two weeks.



Ths is why people shouldn't focus on the number of copies sold, but how it actually reached that number.
Where are you getting the revenue from LOU:R?
 
Lifetime dollar sales = revenue.

Does this not include every game other than Spider-Man and God of War at the time?

It's only right to assume that this was also the case worldwide.

So you're just assuming the game was more profitable because LOU2 was higher on the revenue list without taking into consideration operating costs in developing the game... which was my point.

TLOU2 at its release was almost certainly the most expensive Sony game of all time. So you can't just look at revenue to determine whether it met expectations.

The expectations were probably 15-20 million units and it didn't hit that.

Ghost of Tsushima for example was probably considerably more profitable as an original IP compared to what Sony must have considered their top IP at the time of release.
 

DForce

Member
So you're just assuming the game was more profitable because LOU2 was higher on the revenue list without taking into consideration operating costs in developing the game... which was my point.

No, I actually look at everything.
We're talking about 2 weeks of sales data in comparison to 4-6 years worth.
If it made more revenue in the US after only 2 weeks and it continue to sell after almost 3 years, then that means it continued to make revenue. You can say I didn't factor in development cost, but an extra 50m is not going to be hard to make after 2 years if the sales continue.

TLOU2 at its release was almost certainly the most expensive Sony game of all time. So you can't just look at revenue to determine whether it met expectations.

The expectations were probably 15-20 million units and it didn't hit that.

Ghost of Tsushima for example was probably considerably more profitable as an original IP compared to what Sony must have considered their top IP at the time of release.

You're making assumptions based on these factors.

- No sales annoucements
- In comparison to other first-party sales (Spider-Man and God of War)
- Last of Us PS3/PS4 sales

I told someone else in this thread, 15-20 sales is a ridiculous amount to be sold if the console has been bundled. Uncharted 4, Spider-man PS4, Horizon Zero Dawn, and God of War all reached that number with a large number of bundles. So I don't believe they were expecting that much when they only released a limited edition bundle.

I'm very sure if they re-release the PS5 version and it's bundled and it reaches close to 15 million in sales, we're going to see many people talk about bundles after ignoring it for the first 3 years of this game's relase.
 
The Limited Edition Ps4 Pro Bundle of Part II was limited to only 20k units WW, very low numbers.

Following the OP, it seems that there always some fuzz about Playstation sales, games that supposedly underperformed, if a PS 1st game did better was due to heavy bundles, not too much revenue, if it did too much revenue the budget was extremely high and so on.

The European results for February 2023 will be posted tomorrow, at least the focus will shift towards that.
 

TheTony316

Member
I honestly don't get it...MS has a console on sale for like twice as cheap as a PS5 right now.
It's been not even 2 and half years since these consoles released.


I really think the reason why Xbox was doing bigger numbers last year was due to PS5 being unavailable everywhere. This has been mentioned more times before, and it's getting clearer now.

PS5 last big release was God of War in November. It's not like these huge numbers were due to a big recent release...

Anyway, it's clear that this year PS5 will be the big seller everywhere...and if this keeps up even winning Japan.

Anyway...moving on to my favorite part:

7The Last of Us: Part 2
14The Last of Us: Remastered (Sony)
19The Last of Us: Part 1 (Sony)

The PS4 remaster ahead of the remake isn't huge news considering the price gap...but seeing TLOU2 above both of them is incredible and something GAF must be loving as well :messenger_clapping:

It's actually pretty simple.

Playstation is just a much bigger brand, especially in Europe. People here who aren't into gaming assume every console they see is a Playstation. No amount of price cuts can change that.
 

Elysion

Member
I’m confused. If XBox sales are up this February compared to January, and they are also up compared to February last year, how come they‘re down year-to-date? Was January this year particularly bad for them or something?
 
No, I actually look at everything.
We're talking about 2 weeks of sales data in comparison to 4-6 years worth.
If it made more revenue in the US after only 2 weeks and it continue to sell after almost 3 years, then that means it continued to make revenue. You can say I didn't factor in development cost, but an extra 50m is not going to be hard to make after 2 years if the sales continue.



You're making assumptions based on these factors.

- No sales annoucements
- In comparison to other first-party sales (Spider-Man and God of War)
- Last of Us PS3/PS4 sales

I told someone else in this thread, 15-20 sales is a ridiculous amount to be sold if the console has been bundled. Uncharted 4, Spider-man PS4, Horizon Zero Dawn, and God of War all reached that number with a large number of bundles. So I don't believe they were expecting that much when they only released a limited edition bundle.

I'm very sure if they re-release the PS5 version and it's bundled and it reaches close to 15 million in sales, we're going to see many people talk about bundles after ignoring it for the first 3 years of this game's relase.

You don't know how much revenue the remaster generated. You just know that TLOUP2 was higher on the revenue list.

I would be surprised if TLOUP2 wasn't significantly more than 50 million dollars more than TLOUR.

The remaster probably cost 5-10 million to make while the TLOUP2 probably cost 100 million or more.

Also, not all bundles are made the same. Some come at no additional cost and some cost generally an extra 50+ bucks. You have to look at them on an individual basis to determine revenue from those bundled sales.

God of War had the same type of bundle as TLOUP2 yet still sold significantly better. The same is true for Spider-Man. Yet I guarantee you that TLOUP2 probably cost more than either game.

Let's say that TLOUR sold 12 million at an average of 30 dollars, which is 360 million less 10 million in operating cost = 350 million dollars
Now let's say TLOUP2 sold 10 million at an average of 45 dollars (which is aggressive in favor), that would be 450 dollars less 100 million = 350 million.

That TLOUR would be anywhere close to the same profitability as the sequel in terms of ROI is not good for TLOUP2
 
It's actually pretty simple.

Playstation is just a much bigger brand, especially in Europe. People here who aren't into gaming assume every console they see is a Playstation. No amount of price cuts can change that.

Microsoft's strategy this generation needed to be regrowing its advantage in North America while expanding in Europe.

That just hasn't been the case.

30 vs 18 million SOUNDS close until you forecast what the rest of this year is going to look like, particularly in North America.

With Hogwarts (yes, we all realize it isn't exclusive, but with supply and marketing it basically is), FF16, and Spider-Man, Sony is almost certainly going to outsell Microsoft 2:1 in North America this year, if not more than that.

Losing North America is just not an option for Microsoft and I suspect we'll see a price drop for the Series X this holiday season from 500 to 400 if not less.
 
I’m confused. If XBox sales are up this February compared to January, and they are also up compared to February last year, how come they‘re down year-to-date? Was January this year particularly bad for them or something?

You misread this.

Xbox is up in February over January and up in February over February of last year, but they were down significantly in January to the tune of -30 something percent. That's why they're still down on the year. That being said, that seems like a decent enough recovery from a really poor start, but we don't know the actual numbers. The more alarming part of this news is the increase for PS5, but again PS5 had really poor stock last year.
 

Unknown?

Member
I mean the last 5 games from Todd and his team are -

Morrowind
Oblivion
Fallout 3
Skyrim
Fallout 4.

Its not exactly 'blind faith' as such. I think Todd and his team have earned a bit of faith and excitememnt for their next product.
Keyword there is bit. Content is what matters and all these people going around trying to hype it up are mostly fakes. The most you can say is it will likely be good and that's not hype. That's like being hyped for the next Naughty Dog game(Factions). Some will be hyped no matter what but until previews and information come out, most gamers aren't going to care because we have no idea how it will play despite their prestige.
 
No one's hyped for Starfield, because they haven't shown crap for it yet. Only blind faith people are.

You're not wrong. I don't know if gaming "journalism" or even gamers themselves can be unbiased about Starfield.

You basically have an entire gaming ecosystem riding on the game being GOTY, if it bombs or is just average the generation is basically over, and there might not be a subsequent generation as a result.

This inherently makes people want to believe the game is going to be the best thing since sliced bread.

The problem is even if the game is hyped up, even if reviewers give it 10s and 9s, Microsoft's model makes it difficult to really be that impactful.

You're not going to get PC players to buy any Xboxes because it is on PC and it's going to be on GamePass day 1.

Microsoft basically needs to announce that it isn't going to be on GamePass right away and it isn't going to be on PC right away for this to have any real impact, but doing either of these things might create a significant backlash, which they can't afford either.

Starfield has to be excellent AND it needs to overcome the business model Microsoft has built around it AND they need to have enough Xbox stock to take advantage of it AND they need to be able to overcome the hype surrounding other games like Spider-Man 2 and FF16.

When a kid asks their parents for a console for christmas, they're going to look for Spider-Man 2 and PS5 not random space game and an Xbox Series X.

Starfield has to translate beyond the zeitgeist of Bethesda games and be more successful than Skyrim on fewer hardware options... When Bethesda hasn't had anywhere close to that success in the last 10 years...

Basically, it's a tall order for a game we've barely seen....
 

Stuart360

Banned
Keyword there is bit. Content is what matters and all these people going around trying to hype it up are mostly fakes. The most you can say is it will likely be good and that's not hype. That's like being hyped for the next Naughty Dog game(Factions). Some will be hyped no matter what but until previews and information come out, most gamers aren't going to care because we have no idea how it will play despite their prestige.
Well i mean its also the no.1 most wishlisted game on Steam too, i dont think there is any reason why Steam users would 'fake hype' the game.
People are just excited for a new Bethesda RPG.
 

midnightAI

Gold Member
You don't know how much revenue the remaster generated. You just know that TLOUP2 was higher on the revenue list.

I would be surprised if TLOUP2 wasn't significantly more than 50 million dollars more than TLOUR.

The remaster probably cost 5-10 million to make while the TLOUP2 probably cost 100 million or more.

Also, not all bundles are made the same. Some come at no additional cost and some cost generally an extra 50+ bucks. You have to look at them on an individual basis to determine revenue from those bundled sales.

God of War had the same type of bundle as TLOUP2 yet still sold significantly better. The same is true for Spider-Man. Yet I guarantee you that TLOUP2 probably cost more than either game.

Let's say that TLOUR sold 12 million at an average of 30 dollars, which is 360 million less 10 million in operating cost = 350 million dollars
Now let's say TLOUP2 sold 10 million at an average of 45 dollars (which is aggressive in favor), that would be 450 dollars less 100 million = 350 million.

That TLOUR would be anywhere close to the same profitability as the sequel in terms of ROI is not good for TLOUP2
So Sony/Naughty Dog make 700 million from two games.... Nice
 

Stuart360

Banned
They developed the whole game or are you grasping at straws?
Dude its not some secret, Google it. Bethesda Austin built the game and its design. Some of the other teams helped with some asset creation, but the main game was made ny Bethesda Austin, who was a studio under a different name that Bethesda bought and changed their name due to a not exactly stellar track record with their past games.
There are multiple Bethesda studios under the 'Bethesda' banner,. and also other studios like ID, Arcane, etc.
 
Dude its not some secret, Google it. Bethesda Austin built the game and its design. Some of the other teams helped with some asset creation, but the main game was made ny Bethesda Austin, who was a studio under a different name that Bethesda bought and changed their name due to a not exactly stellar track record with their past games.
There are multiple Bethesda studios under the 'Bethesda' banner,. and also other studios like ID, Arcane, etc.

Find one source that said that Bethesda austin was the primary team behind 76. They worked the game engine, but the work from other studios wasn't minor in fact it appears the design of the game still came from the Maryland HQ.

This is a deflection to avoid the reality that Bethesda isn't as good as they have been historically.
 

DForce

Member
You don't know how much revenue the remaster generated. You just know that TLOUP2 was higher on the revenue list.

The information I shared from NPD is self-explanatory. It's higher because it made more revenue.
I would be surprised if TLOUP2 wasn't significantly more than 50 million dollars more than TLOUR.

The remaster probably cost 5-10 million to make while the TLOUP2 probably cost 100 million or more.
You have just over 8 million lifetime sales from PS4 version.
Also, not all bundles are made the same. Some come at no additional cost and some cost generally an extra 50+ bucks. You have to look at them on an individual basis to determine revenue from those bundled sales.
Last of Us bundles were sold at MRSP or bundled with 1 or 2 other titles.
God of War had the same type of bundle as TLOUP2 yet still sold significantly better. The same is true for Spider-Man. Yet I guarantee you that TLOUP2 probably cost more than either game.

That's not true.

God of War and Spider-Man both had limited edition bundles.

God of War launched more than 4-4 different bundles within the same year, even more within the first 2 years.

Sony released Spider-Man PS4 Slim bundle which was selling like hot takes because it was $199.99 and other bundles later on.

Let's say that TLOUR sold 12 million at an average of 30 dollars, which is 360 million less 10 million in operating cost = 350 million dollars
Now let's say TLOUP2 sold 10 million at an average of 45 dollars (which is aggressive in favor), that would be 450 dollars less 100 million = 350 million.

Last of Us Part II was the third-highest publishing title in the US. The list Mat Piscatella talked about was PS4 titles, but the NPD report says Lifetime dollar sales for any PlayStation title, which likely includes Last of Us PS3/PS4 in the US.

According to Mat Piscatella of The NPD Group, the third best-grossing PlayStation video game ever in the United States is The Last of Us Part II. In lifetime dollar sales, the only Sony-published titles above it are Marvel's Spider-Man and 2018's God of War. In addition for the US, The Last of Us Part II is the year's third greatest-selling game the report says, beaten only by Animal Crossing: New Horizons and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare.


That TLOUR would be anywhere close to the same profitability as the sequel in terms of ROI is not good for TLOUP2


There's a major issue with your estimate.

Last of Us Remastered was bundled for more than 5 years. It's one (if not the most) longest-running console bundles ever for Sony.


It's like that more than half of those sales of the remastered version were due to bundles. You can look up all the different Last of Us bundles, there are more than 15 on the PS4 alone.

 

Lyrical

Banned
Why do people have such a problem with bundles? I would only buy a bundle if I am interested in the game it comes with. Why are bundled sales being discredited?
 
The information I shared from NPD is self-explanatory. It's higher because it made more revenue.

You have just over 8 million lifetime sales from PS4 version.

Last of Us bundles were sold at MRSP or bundled with 1 or 2 other titles.


That's not true.

God of War and Spider-Man both had limited edition bundles.

God of War launched more than 4-4 different bundles within the same year, even more within the first 2 years.

Sony released Spider-Man PS4 Slim bundle which was selling like hot takes because it was $199.99 and other bundles later on.



Last of Us Part II was the third-highest publishing title in the US. The list Mat Piscatella talked about was PS4 titles, but the NPD report says Lifetime dollar sales for any PlayStation title, which likely includes Last of Us PS3/PS4 in the US.







There's a major issue with your estimate.

Last of Us Remastered was bundled for more than 5 years. It's one (if not the most) longest-running console bundles ever for Sony.


It's like that more than half of those sales of the remastered version were due to bundles. You can look up all the different Last of Us bundles, there are more than 15 on the PS4 alone.


We already know it made more revenue, what I said is we don't know how much more revenue it made, nor do we know the operating costs, development and advertising budget for either game.

Not sure which PS4 game you're referring to.

You don't know how many units of any bundles sold particularly any configuration of bundle

Please find me a ps4 slim + spider-man bundle for 200 dollars...

Again, just because a game has more revenue, doesn't mean it was more profitable. You continue to ignore operating costs because it is inconvenient to your argument.

Huge assumption that people were buying the last of us bundled with Ps4 years after the release. This was not a predominant bundle in 2017 let alone 2018 and beyond.

Also not all bundles are Sony bundles. Please find me the 15 Sony branded LOU:R PS4 bundles... jesus...
 

Stuart360

Banned
Find one source that said that Bethesda austin was the primary team behind 76. They worked the game engine, but the work from other studios wasn't minor in fact it appears the design of the game still came from the Maryland HQ.

This is a deflection to avoid the reality that Bethesda isn't as good as they have been historically.
Mate the game was directed by Doug Mellencamp, the head of Bethesda Austin, and the former head of Battlecry studios (who was rebanded into Bethesda Austin).
Even the Fallout Wiki's state the work from other Bethesda studios was mainly asset creation.
Just Google 'Fallout 76, Bethesda Austin.

I'm sure Todd had a lot of say in various aspects of the games creation ,as head of Bethesda, but he didnt direct the game and even in the games credits he's only listed as 'Executive producer'.

The same thing happened with Fallout New Vegas where Todd got another studio to develop the game while he and his team were hard at work on Skyrim. He was hard at work on Starfield once Fallout 4's final dlc was finished, and Bethesda Austrin was asked to make Fallout 76,with support from other Bethesda studios.
 
Mate the game was directed by Doug Mellencamp, the head of Bethesda Austin, and the former head of Battlecry studios (who was rebanded into Bethesda Austin).
Even the Fallout Wiki's state the work from other Bethesda studios was mainly asset creation.
Just Google 'Fallout 76, Bethesda Austin.

I'm sure Todd had a lot of say in various aspects of the games creation ,as head of Bethesda, but he didnt direct the game and even in the games credits he's only listed as 'Executive producer'.

The same thing happened with Fallout New Vegas where Todd got another studio to develop the game while he and his team were hard at work on Skyrim. He was hard at work on Starfield once Fallout 4's final dlc was finished, and Bethesda Austrin was asked to make Fallout 76,with support from other Bethesda studios.

"With Bethesda Game Studios in Maryland, BGSA co-developed Fallout 76. The company was tasked with modifying and restructuring the Creation Engine (with help from Id Software using netcode from Quake Champions) to support the multiplayer functionality needed to realize the game.[2]"

From the fallout wiki

Also Emil Pagliarulo was the lead designer... from the Rockville team.
 

Stuart360

Banned
"With Bethesda Game Studios in Maryland, BGSA co-developed Fallout 76. The company was tasked with modifying and restructuring the Creation Engine (with help from Id Software using netcode from Quake Champions) to support the multiplayer functionality needed to realize the game.[2]"

From the fallout wiki

Also Emil Pagliarulo was the lead designer... from the Rockville team.
And?, Bethesda Austin developed the bulk of the game. This isnt some industry secret, this all came out when Fallout 76 launched in a poor state, and industry people started digging.

The fact is, like with Fallout New Vegas, Todd didnt direct the game, and he and his team were hard at work on Starfield, like they were hard at work on Skyrim when New Vegas was devloped.

And hell, even if Todd DID direct Fallout 76, one mistake doesnt erase his history and a resume that 99% of game driectors would die for.
Besideds 76 is almost a different gaem today as it was at launch, and can even be played as a standard Fallout game today.

Trying to downplay Todd and his team just makes some of you look salty as hell.
 

DForce

Member
We already know it made more revenue, what I said is we don't know how much more revenue it made, nor do we know the operating costs, development and advertising budget for either game.
We all make estimates.

If TLOU:R sold around 11m-13m and TLOU2 surpassed it in less than 3 weeks, then you would think bundles were a major factor in TLOU:R sales.

There's no other way that would happen unless bundles were a major part in those sales figures.

This is based on 2 weeks' data and the Last of Us Part II was still selling and TLOU revenue literally stopped. You also factor in a collectors edition, and digital revenue (which was much lower during the PS3 era). So making more revenue remains HIGHLY likely based on these factors alone.
You don't know how many units of any bundles sold particularly any configuration of bundle
If it was beaten in less than 2 weeks then the bundles were significant.

Please find me a ps4 slim + spider-man bundle for 200 dollars...
sony-playstation-black-friday.jpg


This was a hot item back in 2018. They were being scaped because of the price tag.

mh0pebmr2b021.jpg


I'm not saying most or even half of Spider-Man sales were due to bundles, but this sure did help.
Again, just because a game has more revenue, doesn't mean it was more profitable. You continue to ignore operating costs because it is inconvenient to your argument.

I have more data that supports my argument than yours. This is the only thing you can say to counter what I just told you.
-TLOU2 wasn't nearly as bundled as TLOU1
-TLOU2 had a higher price point
-TLOU2 had more special editions and collectors editions
-TLOU2 benefited from digital purchases in comparison to TLOU1

You can ignore this and continue to believe that the operating cost was somehow way more significant than the previous title, which his highly unlikely.
Huge assumption that people were buying the last of us bundled with Ps4 years after the release. This was not a predominant bundle in 2017 let alone 2018 and beyond.

Also not all bundles are Sony bundles. Please find me the 15 Sony branded LOU:R PS4 bundles... jesus...
Dude, it was bundled for years. LOL
EEogbTH.jpg



These are Sony bundles.
WCCFplaystationblackfriday.jpg
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
But we have data. Last of us part 2 took 2 years to reach 10 million sold, while games like God of War 2018 took about a year to reach the same point.
GoW has nothing to do with TLoU2.

People have given reasons above that are quite clear at this point.

The expectations around the game and the userbase at the time, they certainly didn't expect it to perform on par with Ghost of Tsushima are significantly below Uncharted, God of War, Spider-Man, and Horizon...

But keep believing what you want to believe.
They have "reasons" no evidence or data. It's all opinions and assumptions, you do know how that works, yes?

DForce DForce provided far more data than, "trust us, bros."
 
Last edited:
So will it go through without any concessions?

According to you it sounds like it should.

But in terms of going through without any issues the CMA is still the biggest problem for them.
It will go through with concessions we've already seen some of them (proactively by MS) like the Nintendo deal and the Nvidia deal. Such deals wouldn't have happened if the regulatory environment was what it was precovid.
 
I think that's the big issue. If these acquisitions don't help Microsoft gain a ton of market share then maybe they are doing something wrong.

We haven't seen a major big game from a single acquisition YET, so it seems early to ponder about acquisitions not working yet. Other than the fact the games were delayed, but we have no idea who to blame for that, the devs who would have released a subpar game and delayed to improve the software, or Microsoft for causing the delay by micromanaging.

Do we have the splits for Hogwarts Legacy?

Yep, banana.

It's you that doesn't understand.
If February was up and year-to-date was down, that means it's was down this January vs last January.

Meaning from January to now, it's down vs the same time frame last year.

This thread is about February.

You're completely lost and are arguing about something I never argued. This is what I said,

Xbox was up last month though.

The person I was responding to didn't think Hogwarts moved any Xbox's, I said that Xbox was up last month (February) to indicate that maybe it did move some Xbox's.

You jumped in right after that. There was never any argument about YTD or being u or down in January, the conversation was about February, and the Xbox being up in February.

You completely changed the topic to pretend there was a different conversation. You never had a point.
 
Why do people have such a problem with bundles? I would only buy a bundle if I am interested in the game it comes with. Why are bundled sales being discredited?
Depends on the narrative and console, with the PS5 is very different since the cost of the game is included in the bundle, no more “free” game or added value.

So the narrative has shifted from “the games were given for free” to “forced bundles”.
 
Last edited:
i didn’t even start hearing about bundles being brought up in sales discussions until horizon came out last year

Meanwhile nintendo is still selling bundles of mario kart 8 almost 10 years later
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom