Jump to content

Koei is apparently very happy with the sales


Recommended Posts

FE Warriors is in need of some positive news after all that negativity, even if it just Koei patting themselves on the back.

And apparently Koei is ''extremely happy'' with the FE warriors sales so far. Its possible they are just being polite but its a positive sentiment. It especially helps relieve my biggest fear with the game. The foundation is solid so far but FE warriors isn't the game it could have been. The game bombing would let it stay this way but strong sales make a sequel possible that builds on what this game already achieved and caters to more sides of the fanbase.

So with Koei voicing their happiness with the sales a sequel is at least no longer a pipe dream.

http://nintendoenthusiast.com/blog/2017/10/28/koei-tecmo-extremely-happy-switch-game-sales/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 195
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, Harvey said:

Why do I get the feeling that its more of PR talk and less about talking things seriously?

There is no way that they could possibly make a lot of buck from the Switch all of a sudden....right?

If it didn't make bank, they wouldn't say anything.

KT has been having a pretty good year overall, surpassing profit expectations. Plus, it has sold more than most other Musou spin-offs/crossovers in the past few years (we don't know what the Western numbers are like, but it did shoot up Amazon's rankings in the weeks before release to right behind SMO).

Trying to discredit this statement is like trying to argue SoV failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that some people think that it means nothing when the devs themselves say they were successful, but...

If they weren't successful, they just wouldn't say anything at all.  Or in the worst circumstances, they would even acknowledge their failings.  Companies that pretend things are fine when they certainly aren't are few and far between.  As frustrating as the PR cycle with this game was, I really don't think KT is one of those companies.

If they say the game met their expectations, then I believe them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BrightBow said:

This is fantastic news. It's always great to hear that people I do not know make a ton of money.

No, try harder to be edgy and cynical.

57 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Which a lot of people still seem to do.

And out themselves as trolls/fools in the process.
BTW, have you considered reporting the OP asking for it to be moved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BrightBow said:

This is fantastic news. It's always great to hear that people I do not know make a ton of money.

When those people are making stuff I want, it certainly is fantastic news!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Harvey said:

Why do I get the feeling that its more of PR talk and less about talking things seriously?

There is no way that they could possibly make a lot of buck from the Switch all of a sudden....right?

They wouldn't be saying anything if they weren't pleased with the result. Learning company standards for their statements like this is kind of key to actually know what you're talking about.

Edited by Jedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jedi said:

They wouldn't be saying anything if they weren't pleased with the result. Learning company standards for their statements like this is kind of key to actually know what you're talking about.

If that is the case, then why Nintendo didn't reveal the sales of SoV when they stated that it was a popular title?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lucario666 said:

We "argue" that because games selling under a million is generally not profitable. 

That's a flatout lie. Games with modest budgets(I'd be surprised if Echoes cost more than 10 million to make and advertise) can make back money very quickly. 

Mega-blockbusters in the gaming industry are the ones that need to reach numbers in the millions, like the infamous case of Square being disappointed with the Tomb Raider reboot's "meager" 4 million sales. A large part of game budgets these days comes from advertising. Something like a new Call of Duty usually costs 30-50 million to actually make, which is pretty standard for a big AAA game, but Activision is RIDICULOUS with advertising, often going well over 200 million dollars with advertising alone, with all kinds of partnerships with dumb stuff like Doritos and Mountain Dew. But Activision expects upwards of 10 million sales with a CoD game. 

Most bigger budget games don't blow 7x the budget of the game on advertising, and do just fine breaking a million. 

Major game publishers aren't stupid(Usually) when it comes to hedging expectations. Yes, again, there are cases like Square and their unrealistic expectations on things like TR, but if a game meets expectations, that usually means it made a profit. Game development is a business. Businesses always base expectations on if it makes a profit, unless something goes horribly wrong and they see that a project will never make a profit, but they already put the time and money into it where they'd rather recoup some of the costs rather than none at all. 

Echoes met expectations at whatever it sold. Warriors probably did(Koei didn't explicitly say that Warriors was what they were happy about, just the sales of their games on the Switch, which right now is just two games). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Lucario666 said:

We "argue" that because games selling under a million is generally not profitable. 

Its all about budget. No different than movies. For example, Avengers made 1.5 billion worldwise. Huge success for a movie. Annabelle on the other hand, made about 200 million. Also a successful movie. Why? Budget.

Annabelle's production costs was about 6 million, the Avengers production cost was 220 million. Notice the difference?

It works the same exact way for video games. Shadows of Valentia, taking into account that it reused the 3DS FE engine, required a lot less money to produce than something like Witcher III Wild Hunt, which used its own engine and was a much higher production. Therefore, Shadows of Valentia required far less money to be considered succesful as compared to what Witcher III needed to be successful. And that is still lowballing it considering Witcher only required 81 million for production, where as GTA 5 and Star Wars KOTOR required 200 million production budgets.

I highly doubt FEW had a production cost even half of those two games, considering its already been received as a success regarding its current sales.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Harvey said:

If that is the case, then why Nintendo didn't reveal the sales of SoV when they stated that it was a popular title?

 

I mean saying it sold through most of its stock is basically that isn't it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29.10.2017 at 1:21 PM, Etrurian emperor said:

FE Warriors is in need of some positive news after all that negativity, even if it just Koei patting themselves on the back.

And apparently Koei is ''extremely happy'' with the FE warriors sales so far. Its possible they are just being polite but its a positive sentiment. It especially helps relieve my biggest fear with the game. The foundation is solid so far but FE warriors isn't the game it could have been. The game bombing would let it stay this way but strong sales make a sequel possible that builds on what this game already achieved and caters to more sides of the fanbase.

So with Koei voicing their happiness with the sales a sequel is at least no longer a pipe dream.

http://nintendoenthusiast.com/blog/2017/10/28/koei-tecmo-extremely-happy-switch-game-sales/

Sounds about right. They did state that they had to adjust their expected profits upwards due to, among other things, Fire Emblem Warriors a while back so I was expecting to hear good news on this front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/10/2017 at 10:25 AM, Harvey said:

Why do I get the feeling that its more of PR talk and less about talking things seriously?

There is no way that they could possibly make a lot of buck from the Switch all of a sudden....right?

They make a lot of buck from the lower costs of Musou.

They made profits from games that sold a lot less, and for all the screwing up that IS/Nintendo did in the roster with Lyn/Celica/Anna, they likely helped fund some stuff, and Nintendo helped with propaganda through directs and such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Tolvir said:

Its all about budget. No different than movies. For example, Avengers made 1.5 billion worldwise. Huge success for a movie. Annabelle on the other hand, made about 200 million. Also a successful movie. Why? Budget.

Annabelle's production costs was about 6 million, the Avengers production cost was 220 million. Notice the difference?

It works the same exact way for video games. Shadows of Valentia, taking into account that it reused the 3DS FE engine, required a lot less money to produce than something like Witcher III Wild Hunt, which used its own engine and was a much higher production. Therefore, Shadows of Valentia required far less money to be considered succesful as compared to what Witcher III needed to be successful. And that is still lowballing it considering Witcher only required 81 million for production, where as GTA 5 and Star Wars KOTOR required 200 million production budgets.

I highly doubt FEW had a production cost even half of those two games, considering its already been received as a success regarding its current sales.

 

Yup. Cost Vs Revenue is the name of the game, not sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wissenschaft said:

Not sure why some people seem to want this game to fail.

No doubt they feel slighted because of the roster. And honestly, I can understand where they're coming from; I think it was misguided to only base this game on three installments. However, if the game fails, then that might impact the core series negatively overall, or at least any future spin-offs, so hoping for poor sales would be like shooting ourselves in the foot. 

Personally, I hope they noticed the backlash and, in the case of a hypothetical sequel, try to implement a more ambitious roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thane said:

Personally, I hope they noticed the backlash and, in the case of a hypothetical sequel, try to implement a more ambitious roster.

That interview that came out shortly before the game came out seemed to hint at this. Basically, they wanted more obscure pulls, but kept getting told by Nintendo/IS to pull from popularity polls and the big sellers in FE(SD, Awakening, Fates). Then they basically said "WELL IF WE GET A SEQUEL WE'D GET MORE FREEDOM TO PICK!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Slumber said:

That interview that came out shortly before the game came out seemed to hint at this. Basically, they wanted more obscure pulls, but kept getting told by Nintendo/IS to pull from popularity polls and the big sellers in FE(SD, Awakening, Fates). Then they basically said "WELL IF WE GET A SEQUEL WE'D GET MORE FREEDOM TO PICK!"

Is it this interview?

http://nintendoeverything.com/fire-emblem-warriors-devs-on-characters-and-handling-of-reveals-designs-story-systems-modes/

Because this shows that they are fates fans and would make it fates warriors if they could.

Like they had to include sakura and elise or the other siblings would worry about them. Instead of for example making it an incentive for them to end this conflict and return. Like characters from other games wouldn`t have this problem.

This interview is more along the lines of "you thought this is fates-awakening warriors, no it isn`t we included lyn and shadow dragon characters not many but some so we`re good"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheRadiantKnight said:

Is it this interview?

http://nintendoeverything.com/fire-emblem-warriors-devs-on-characters-and-handling-of-reveals-designs-story-systems-modes/

Because this shows that they are fates fans and would make it fates warriors if they could.

Like they had to include sakura and elise or the other siblings would worry about them. Instead of for example making it an incentive for them to end this conflict and return. Like characters from other games wouldn`t have this problem.

This interview is more along the lines of "you thought this is fates-awakening warriors, no it isn`t we included lyn and shadow dragon characters not many but some so we`re good"

 

I can't remember. There were a lot of pre-release interviews that they gave to try to explain the roster choices.

But I do remember one where they basically said "Yeah, we'll do a more obscure roster if we get a sequel!""

Edited by Slumber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...