• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Sales Data Famitsu Sales: Week 14, 2024 (Apr. 1-7)

I mean, considering i'm making fun of the idea said by the above commenters, no
Okay good to know then, my bad lmao

EDIT: In hindsight, foolish of me to fall for it when you have a DMC (popular franchise on ps2) pfp. I should've known better it was sarcastic lol
 
0
"The PS2 was only popular because it was a DVD player" is a take so ignorant that calling it asinine would be an understatement.
The takes not ignorant that take is true. Its a well documented thing as well. I said I liked the ps2 im not shitting on it. But the ps2 was used very widely as a dvd player. Iv seen it first hand.

Do you also not believe the Wii was not a wii bowling machine for people to that put it away in storage after 2 months of use? I loved the Wii but alot of people bought it because grandma liked to bowl. a big portion to. Just pointing that out to prove im not being a Nintendrone fanboy here lol. I always admit the truth about anything lol

I had it and liked it. I am just stating the facts. The ps2 was massively used as a dvd player. Everyone knows that and its a well documented fact and Iv seen it so many times in my own personal life.


Im not saying the ps2 didint deserve its sales either im just saying out of like 155 million units or whatever it sold probably 130 million used it for gaming and the rest were watching dvds lol it was a very affordable dvd player for the time
 
Am I in bizarro world now? Are we actually pretending the PS2 isn't very popular as a video game system?
It was very popular as a video game machine I had one myself. But a big chunk of its user base was non gamers who used it as a dvd player. Not majority and probably not even 1/3 but atleast a few million who bought a ps2 never once put a game in its disc drive
 
The takes not ignorant that take is true. Its a well documented thing as well. I said I liked the ps2 im not shitting on it. But the ps2 was used very widely as a dvd player. Iv seen it first hand.

Do you also not believe the Wii was not a wii bowling machine for people to that put it away in storage after 2 months of use? I loved the Wii but alot of people bought it because grandma liked to bowl. a big portion to. Just pointing that out to prove im not being a Nintendrone fanboy here lol. I always admit the truth about anything lol

I had it and liked it. I am just stating the facts. The ps2 was massively used as a dvd player. Everyone knows that and its a well documented fact and Iv seen it so many times in my own personal life.


Im not saying the ps2 didint deserve its sales either im just saying out of like 155 million units or whatever it sold probably 130 million used it for gaming and the rest were watching dvds lol it was a very affordable dvd player for the time
There is a difference between saying "a lot of people bought the PS2 for non-gaming purposes" and "PS2 isn't popular as a gaming system".

Mind if I quote what you've just said?

" Playstation fans love to pretend that the ps2 was popular for gaming"
 
There is a difference between saying "a lot of people bought the PS2 for non-gaming purposes" and "PS2 isn't popular as a gaming system".

Mind if I quote what you've just said?

" Playstation fans love to pretend that the ps2 was popular for gaming"
I meant to say only for gaming. my bad on that one.
 
It was very popular as a video game machine I had one myself. But a big chunk of its user base was non gamers who used it as a dvd player. Not majority and probably not even 1/3 but atleast a few million who bought a ps2 never once put a game in its disc drive
This is a much more of a reasonable take yeah. I don't think it makes the PS2 sales any less of an impressive feat though. (I say this as someone who doesn't play my PS2 much, but it's a system I'm definitely interested in exploring more sometime. Was more of a GBA kid lol)
 
Also btw im not saying the ps2 was the only one console that did this. Before rokus and smart tvs were a thing alot of non gamers had a wii, ps3 or a xbox 360 For Streaming netflix and youtube to their tv.

The only difference is that the ps2 had alot more people using it as a movie machine than the wii xbox 360 and ps3 did
 
I had the ps2 along with my gamecube back in the day. Its a nice system but Playstation fans love to pretend that the ps2 was popular only for gaming but a BIG portion of those sales numbers for being one of the cheapest dvd players at the time. I knew more people who had the ps2 as a dvd player and had no games for it. Most of them none gamers to like older folks and stuff like that. Even my school had a ps2 as its dvd player when they would roll in the big tv back in the day for us to watch like a civil war movie or something in class or even bill nye lmfao
To this I say the same thing as when people said a lot of Wii owners only had Wii Sports. The tie ratio is very high with about 10 PS2 games sold per PS2 hardware, so if there was a large portion of the userbase that weren't game buyers, the ones who were game buyers were REALLY GAME BUYERS. The PS1 had a slightly lower software tie ratio, so all things being even you might guess more people bought PS1 as a CD player than bought PS2 as a DVD player.
 
This is a much more of a reasonable take yeah. I don't think it makes the PS2 sales any less of an impressive feat though. (I say this as someone who doesn't play my PS2 much, but it's a system I'm definitely interested in exploring more sometime. Was more of a GBA kid lol)
No its sales would not be super effected by it. And tbh when I say that alot of people used the ps2 as a media machine thats not a knock on the console that just proves how feature rich it was which is just another perk for the system. I think the ps2 is a fantastic system I sunk many hours into Jak and Daxter and Sly Cooper as well as many other games. I remember there was a game where you played as a dragon (not spyro but I do love spyro) where you would like burn whole citys down it was kinda a dark and griddy game but it was fun!

Having a Gamecube and a Ps2 growing up was so amazing I am so thankful for my childhood
 
To this I say the same thing as when people said a lot of Wii owners only had Wii Sports. The tie ratio is very high with about 10 PS2 games sold per PS2 hardware, so if there was a large portion of the userbase that weren't game buyers, the ones who were game buyers were REALLY GAME BUYERS. The PS1 had a slightly lower software tie ratio, so all things being even you might guess more people bought PS1 as a CD player than bought PS2 as a DVD player.
Oh yea. Ps2 had a great library of games to.

I think I should have worded my original post better now lol
 
The PS2 was big for many reasons and to dismiss any one of them is weird.
That was not my intention at all. My only point was that alot of non gamers also bought the ps2. Its success would have been noticable as well without the dvd support. I was not implying it was the driving success factor. I was just trying to say a few million extra sales came from the dvd playback. I do admit my original post came off a bit harsher than I meant so I think I need to edit it lol

And again to the lesser extent the 360 ps3 and wii also were used as media machines before rokus and smart tvs were a thing.
 
All I'll say in regards to the whole "millions of people bought PS2s as DVD players" is this particular anecdote.

Back in 2006-07, I did some game testing on a PS2 game that had previously released in Europe and a budget publisher picked up for North America. After the North American release, the publisher received a few reports that the game was unresponsive if the DVD remote receiver was plugged into the console. That means that at no point ever, even at Sony's certification offices in Europe and North America, did anyone test the game with the remote receiver plugged in. And even if Sony noticed, they never said anything and it was never a certification blocker.

That's how little was cared about the PS2's DVD playback functionality, at least at that point in the console's life.
 
Last edited:
That was not my intention at all. My only point was that alot of non gamers also bought the ps2. Its success would have been noticable as well without the dvd support. I was not implying it was the driving success factor. I was just trying to say a few million extra sales came from the dvd playback. I do admit my original post came off a bit harsher than I meant so I think I need to edit it lol

And again to the lesser extent the 360 ps3 and wii also were used as media machines before rokus and smart tvs were a thing.
I was actually agreeing with you! Too many people dismiss the DVD effect outright.
 
And yet it was considered a financial money pit whose support had to be cut off, because the entire value proposition of Final Fantasy as a brand hasn’t evolved with the times
Weird, the game broke even in 24 hours:

I think the money pit could have been Luminious, but I would assume FFXV breaking even also meant all the costs associated to it, like Luminious.

What do you think could be a nice way for FINAL FANTASY to evolve its value proposition?
 
the FF15 money pit was probably that FF15 wasn't growing much more for the content they were still making for it. so it better to cut it off now and divert that investment elsewhere

Luminous, being an engine, is a continuous investment. by definition, it's a money pit.
 
the FF15 money pit was probably that FF15 wasn't growing much more for the content they were still making for it. so it better to cut it off now and divert that investment elsewhere
Yeah, they stretched it a bit with the second set of DLC. Ardyn's DLC even had a 11 minute animé special and was doubled in price because of the cancelled Aranea, Lunafreya and Noctis DLC. But I think that was more to do with the loss incurred in turning Luminious into a proper studio.
 
0
Weird, the game broke even in 24 hours:

I think the money pit could have been Luminious, but I would assume FFXV breaking even also meant all the costs associated to it, like Luminious.

What do you think could be a nice way for FINAL FANTASY to evolve its value proposition?
Final Fantasy is Square Enix’s flagship title. Since the time FF was at its apex in mindshare, it has failed to replicate the sales numbers of FFVII. In the same time frame, titles like Zelda and Monster Hunter have gone from selling between 5 to 7 million units to selling in the tens of millions consistently.

FFXV had a very strong debut, but legs wise it plummeted as expected with other RPGs. Square Enix wants this franchise to sell like the aforementioned titles, and gives it the attention those brands command. But they have not only failed to meet such goals, FF has regressed sales-wise due to a variety of reasons. If I were a shareholder I’d be seething from the missed opportunity cost from the last fifteen years.
 
eh, probably not. 3 dropped from 2 salewise. Persona's the one likely to overtake FF
3 didn't sell as much as 2, but it wasn't a crazy drop to half of 2 life FF is seeing. I think we should wait and see how things shake out after Xenoblade 4 hits. FF has a much longer legacy than Xenoblade has. A bunch of spinoff games plus other multimedia projects. I think Xenoblade can get there in time.
 
eh, probably not. 3 dropped from 2 salewise. Persona's the one likely to overtake FF
Xenoblade 2 had a freakishly long tail for a non-evergreen title. Given the higher initial sales that XB3 had vs. 2, the fourth Xenoblade should be able to clear 2's number if it's good and if it comes early on Switch 2.

But it's unlikely to beat Final Fantasy without a big hook. "X but with live-service elements promoted in every Nintendo Direct during the Switch 2's existence" could but at that point it's an MMO.
 
The decision to make a remake for FFVII into a trilogy exclusive for Sony platforms was taken at a moment in time when the video game market was simply the opposite of what it’s today. The real problem here is that Square has shown no inclinations to try to offset this trend, and is killing its golden goose in the process.

I’ve been following gaming sales since 2008, and opinions on FF’s brand power back then were such that Square Enix was seen as a real kingmaker. Nowadays, not so much.
I understand why making the remakes Sony exclusives made sense back then.
But can you explain to me why making it a trilogy looked like a good decision back then
 
Last edited:
A trilogy would have made sense much earlier in the ps4's life. Where they could get all 3 games out on the system.

Doing it on the eve of new hardware, this drop was inevitable unless they still maintained a ps4 version
 
Sales of Xenoblade 3 were initially stronger than sales of Xenoblade 2.

Xenoblade 2 had incredible legs, driven by a launch in the first year of Switch (hype), Torna, Pyra in Smash, multiple sales, announcement and launch of Xenoblade Wii HD and announcement and launch of Xenoblade 3.

Hopefully Xenoblade 4 will have an even stronger launch than Xenoblade 3 and, if it launches around the start of Switch 2, legs. Along with the hype of the graphic leap and starting a new arc without depending on the previous ones, it should be the best-selling Xenoblade of the IP
 
A trilogy would have made sense much earlier in the ps4's life. Where they could get all 3 games out on the system.

Doing it on the eve of new hardware, this drop was inevitable unless they still maintained a ps4 version
I'm not a developer but I feel they definitely could've gotten Rebirth running on PS4. The only issue there would be is data streaming and how the overworld is very seamless on PS5. On the other hand, a lot of the transitions between bit open areas have very natural choke points as if they were designed for lesser hardware. I'd imagine they could've done what a prominent AAA dev did to an untamed game for the Switch version and trigger black screen load points in these areas instead of trying to make it seem like a massive open area.
 
0
PS2 was certainly big, but we think we have to keep in mind that it's not the most successful system and not even in the top 5.

PS2 was estimated to make around $2.2 billion in profits, while Nintendo Switch has made over $22 billion in profits.
Chris Dring stated that despite making history in unit sales, it had a really atrocious profit margin.
 
I understand why making the remarks Sony exclusive made sense back then.
But can you explain to me why making it a trilogy looked like a good decision back then
Why get money from consumers once when you can fleece them thrice instead?

The real reason though is that classic RPGs are such expansive games in terms of actual world traversal that staggering development this was was a lot more manageable for them. Sure, they had an open world title in the works with FFXV, but consider the amount of content of that compared to what’s in Rebirth alone and it’s night and day.

There’s also the then recent example of FFXIII, which was not a critical darling but which they were able to squeeze for every penny with the asset reuse in two sequels.
 
PS2 was certainly big, but we think we have to keep in mind that it's not the most successful system and not even in the top 5.

PS2 was estimated to make around $2.2 billion in profits, while Nintendo Switch has made over $22 billion in profits.
Chris Dring stated that despite making history in unit sales, it had a really atrocious profit margin.
Did not know this. Very interesting.
Why is switch profit so high while ps2 so low?
Cost going into creating the consoles?
 
Why get money from consumers once when you can fleece them thrice instead?

The real reason though is that classic RPGs are such expansive games in terms of actual world traversal that staggering development this was was a lot more manageable for them. Sure, they had an open world title in the works with FFXV, but consider the amount of content of that compared to what’s in Rebirth alone and it’s night and day.

There’s also the then recent example of FFXIII, which was not a critical darling but which they were able to squeeze for every penny with the asset reuse in two sequels.
Hopeffully subsequent remake projects are much simpler than Remake and Rebirth and are something more along the lines of open areas rather than open world
 
Hopeffully subsequent remake projects are much simpler than Remake and Rebirth and are something more along the lines of open areas rather than open world
If Square Enix wants FF to become a hit that sells in the scale of Zelda or MonHun, I cannot see them achieving this without going full open world. The problem so far is that they haven’t really committed to any one style, so new players, in as many as they are able to actually convert, don’t form any kind of brand loyalty.
 
Did not know this. Very interesting.
Why is switch profit so high while ps2 so low?
Cost going into creating the consoles?
Well, i dont have actual info, but I imagine constantly cutting the price of a console that was already being sold at a loss isnt a good way to make profit.
 
I always thought that SE overestimate how popular FF 7 is. Marketing played a huge role in its initial success. And it doesn't help that the game always had very vocal fans that make the entry seems way more popular than it actually is. even Remake just sold okay even after SE put all it's weight on the game to succeed
 
By style, do you mean something outside open-world? Because the last four big FINAL FANTASY games (XV, VII Remake, XVI and Rebirth) have all been open world.
Remake wasn't open world. It had large zones, but it wasn't open world like Rebirth or XV are.
 
I always thought that SE overestimate how popular FF 7 is. Marketing played a huge role in its initial success. And it doesn't help that the game always had very vocal fans that make the entry seems way more popular than it actually is. even Remake just sold okay even after SE put all it's weight on the game to succeed
Well, let's not be silly here. FFVII was very popular. Just about anybody 30 or older can probably tell you how they felt the first time they saw the summons or their reaction when, ya know, the scene happens.

There are plenty of reasons that the trilogy might not be lighting the charts on fire but let's not pretend FFVII is anything but an incredibly important and influential game.
 
In 1997 Final Fantasy VII was a ground breaking must play experience. In 2024, FF7 Rebirth is a great game if you enjoyed the original and it has a lot of content to offer but most of it is stuff that is great content for super fans of the FF7 universe.

Rebirth does nothing to stand out in a world where BG3, Elden Ring, BotW/TotK, and Cyberpunk / Witcher 3 exists. It being exclusive to PS5 is the first of many of its problems inhibiting its sales potential.
 
Well, let's not be silly here. FFVII was very popular. Just about anybody 30 or older can probably tell you how they felt the first time they saw the summons or their reaction when, ya know, the scene happens.

There are plenty of reasons that the trilogy might not be lighting the charts on fire but let's not pretend FFVII is anything but an incredibly important and influential game.
I mean to be honest, if the general gist of what they're saying isn't "Final Fantasy VII was never super popular" and more a poorly worded "the market moved on from Final Fantasy VII", it's not really wrong though?

Like, Final Fantasy VII as a brand is well maintained compared to most, especially in a series where each game is unique. But this is only true in the sense that Square is still making money off a 1997 game, most companies wish they could do that. That doesn't change the fact that VII isn't really a big deal to most of the current gaming market, even compared to stuff that is significantly less popular than a GTA or a Fortnite Final Fantasy is way down there compared to Monster Hunter or God of War or a From Soft game. You say that anybody 30 or older can recognize VII, but this ignores that Square should really be trying to get a new audience at this point, never mind that most people who grew up with games in the 90's aren't playing Final Fantasy anyways.

To be honest, I wonder if there is something to Final Fantasy's casual appeal drastically decreasing the moment other games started to get similar graphical fidelity and also started to become more known for pushing storytelling. It's not like when you think of cinematic story based games these days, the first thing that pops into most peoples heads is Final Fantasy.
 
Rebirth does nothing to stand out in a world where BG3, Elden Ring, BotW/TotK, and Cyberpunk / Witcher 3 exists. It being exclusive to PS5 is the first of many of its problems inhibiting its sales potential.

The scale of Rebirth in terms of the variety of locations, amount of content, and the scope of the world is truly tremendous for a game that was made in 3 years.

However, I don't think it's doing anything unique that'd put it in the level of BG3, Elden Ring, or BotW/TotK. But it's absolutely above Cyberpunk and The Witcher
 
The scale of Rebirth in terms of the variety of locations, amount of content, and the scope of the world is truly tremendous for a game that was made in 3 years.

However, I don't think it's doing anything unique that'd put it in the level of BG3, Elden Ring, or BotW/TotK. But it's absolutely above Cyberpunk and The Witcher
Rebirth is not the most unique game our there, but it offers a lengthy and varied experience that's layered on top of being a remake of the original game. It's not going to appeal to everyone, and narrative choices in regards to the type of remake the game is did annoy some fans of the original, but there's no doubt that it's of high quality in many respects.
 
0
All I'll say in regards to the whole "millions of people bought PS2s as DVD players" is this particular anecdote.

Back in 2006-07, I did some game testing on a PS2 game that had previously released in Europe and a budget publisher picked up for North America. After the North American release, the publisher received a few reports that the game was unresponsive if the DVD remote receiver was plugged into the console. That means that at no point ever, even at Sony's certification offices in Europe and North America, did anyone test the game with the remote receiver plugged in. And even if Sony noticed, they never said anything and it was never a certification blocker.

That's how little was cared about the PS2's DVD playback functionality, at least at that point in the console's life.
I don’t understand this anecdote. You didn’t need the remote receiver to use the DVD playback. I honestly didn’t even remember that existing. It was the OG Xbox that required one.

This thread has reminded how popular the Wii was as a Netflix machine. And I agree with the general notion that people downplay how much the DVD functionality helped the PS2. It was going to be the best selling system that gen anyways, clearly, but to act like it had no noticeable effect on sales is being disingenuous. Also didn’t hurt that it was getting all the sports titles for years after the next gen had started so it was the easy budget choice console in its later years.

The PS3 on the other hand is a weird one. Being a cheap Blu Ray player definitely helped early on, but by the end of its life it was no longer the cheap Blu Ray player but it actually recovered in sales so it’s hard to argue that wasn’t primarily due to its games.
 
I don’t understand this anecdote. You didn’t need the remote receiver to use the DVD playback. I honestly didn’t even remember that existing. It was the OG Xbox that required one.

This thread has reminded how popular the Wii was as a Netflix machine. And I agree with the general notion that people downplay how much the DVD functionality helped the PS2. It was going to be the best selling system that gen anyways, clearly, but to act like it had no noticeable effect on sales is being disingenuous. Also didn’t hurt that it was getting all the sports titles for years after the next gen had started so it was the easy budget choice console in its later years.

The PS3 on the other hand is a weird one. Being a cheap Blu Ray player definitely helped early on, but by the end of its life it was no longer the cheap Blu Ray player but it actually recovered in sales so it’s hard to argue that wasn’t primarily due to its games.
You didn't need it, but the remote was far easier and more convenient for DVD use than a DualShock.
 
I mean to be honest, if the general gist of what they're saying isn't "Final Fantasy VII was never super popular" and more a poorly worded "the market moved on from Final Fantasy VII", it's not really wrong though?

Like, Final Fantasy VII as a brand is well maintained compared to most, especially in a series where each game is unique. But this is only true in the sense that Square is still making money off a 1997 game, most companies wish they could do that. That doesn't change the fact that VII isn't really a big deal to most of the current gaming market, even compared to stuff that is significantly less popular than a GTA or a Fortnite Final Fantasy is way down there compared to Monster Hunter or God of War or a From Soft game. You say that anybody 30 or older can recognize VII, but this ignores that Square should really be trying to get a new audience at this point, never mind that most people who grew up with games in the 90's aren't playing Final Fantasy anyways.

To be honest, I wonder if there is something to Final Fantasy's casual appeal drastically decreasing the moment other games started to get similar graphical fidelity and also started to become more known for pushing storytelling. It's not like when you think of cinematic story based games these days, the first thing that pops into most peoples heads is Final Fantasy.
Well, the market definitely moved on. My demo is still here for FFVII but we aren't exactly going to be bumping any company's bottom line (in this industry, at least).
 
0
Honestly, the FFVII games deserve re-releases for current gen consoles. I think we'll see a Rebirth Intergrade for PS6, and at some point a triple pack. The games deserve all the SKUs they can get. It wouldn't surprise me if, in aggregate, the FFVII games sell 13-17 million units.
 
0
You didn't need it, but the remote was far easier and more convenient for DVD use than a DualShock.
I'd be very curious to know how well any remotes designed for consoles sell. Myself aside, I've never met another soul who used anything but the controller for playback on consoles.
 


Back
Top Bottom