Analyst: Lost and Damned earned $18 million online, $3 million at retail

by Alexander Sliwinski { Mar 16th 2009 at 2:47PM }

Electronic Entertainment Design and Research (EEDAR) analyst Jesse Divnich's crystal ball predicts brick-and-mortar retail sales of GTA IV's expansion, The Lost and Damned, to be less than $3 million. He believes current global sales from customers who purchased it across Xbox Live to be around $18 million. This latest bit of analyst prognostication comes following Pachter's missive (translated from an Illuminati memo) that GTA's biker expansion could sell upwards of two million units by year's end.

Although the 6-to-1 online vs. retail ratio seems dramatic, is it really surprising when The Lost and Damned was promoted as a DLC pack anyway? In this case, retail was just a middle man, as those who purchased the "game" at their local bodega received a card with a code to download the expansion. All we really know at this point is that the game is selling very well.

Gallery: Grand Theft Auto IV: The Lost and Damned DLC

Tags: divnich, eedar, gta, gta-iv, gta-iv-the-lost-and-damned, jesse-divnich, lost-and-damned, the-lost-and-damned

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

I Al2x I @ Mar 16th 2009 2:57PM

I'm pretty surprised that online DLC and arcade games through a virtual store holds up so well! I'd expect the average consumer to be afraid to buy online and rather would buy at a brick-n-mortar more often.

Swagman @ Mar 16th 2009 5:51PM

Just like iTunes, right?

Markez @ Mar 16th 2009 6:40PM

Like Urkel.

SoCoolCurt (PSN: KillaKornbread - XBL: SoCoolCurt) @ Mar 16th 2009 7:18PM

well as long as it stays cheap, i don't think people have a problem with it. i mean i just realized the other day that i'm about to graduate college now and that i haven't bought a physical music CD since i started high school. now i personally think that $20 falls out of that 'cheap' category but from looking at the numbers, i'm obviously in the strong minority on that.

Obie @ Mar 16th 2009 2:57PM

I am calling this right now. The next generation of consoles will have giant hard drives and you can buy full games online. Brick and mortar releases will be secondary....bye bye Gamestop! :p

Obie @ Mar 16th 2009 2:58PM

Kinda like Steam actually!

ANTHOLOGY @ Mar 16th 2009 3:10PM

I dont see this happening. The reason people bought this DLC over XBLM rather then from a store is because its the same thing, only over XBLM you dont have to get in the car and go buy it. If there was a way to purchase a disc version of this DLC that you could resell, i would bet most people would have went for that version.

baby sea tuna @ Mar 16th 2009 3:16PM

Yeah, but publishers want games that you *won't* be able to resell. That way they get paid for every copy sold instead of getting paid one time and Gamestop making 100+% profit on every resale thereafter.

Obie @ Mar 16th 2009 3:21PM

I have mixed feelings about this. Sure, I could get the games instantly, without having to deal with knucklehead store clerks. On the other hand, those game downloads will be locked down like hell, I can sell them when I am done or even let a friend borrow them. And I kinda like seeing my game boxes in a row, and not as some ethereal file on a hard drive.

Hmmmm

Obie @ Mar 16th 2009 3:29PM

I meant to type "can't sell or let a friend borrow"....damn autocomplete

Marty @ Mar 16th 2009 3:31PM

"And I kinda like seeing my game boxes in a row..."

I like game boxes, but it has long since passed the time where I've had space to display them on a shelf.

required @ Mar 16th 2009 3:41PM

I don't think or at least I hope we are not expected to pay for storage. It would be nice to have the option of keeping a playlist of games locally but I don't like the idea of constantly expanding space and backing up data. If I trash a game I bought I should be able to redownload from their servers at anytime. The other thing I would expect if we go download only is if I want to trade in a game or sell it I should be able to do so by selling my end user license.

Massmass @ Mar 16th 2009 6:39PM

Digital distribution is nice, but I hope it never takes over physical media. Just look at what happens with physical media that requires online activation. It never leads to a happy ending. Even downloading and being able to back-up on your own is pointless since those back-ups more often than not are always inferior to pressed media. On the flip-side, I suppose being able to easily back-up the game is better in the loooong run since a single disc may not last decades. The actual film, not being scratched over time.

Digital distribution can be nice and convenient, but I'll always appreciate physical media. Plus, there isn't a hard drive in the world that could handle all my gaming needs, generation to generation. Unless they come up with a miracle compression method.

mynk @ Mar 16th 2009 8:15PM

buying full games online... ps3 anyone?

Levi @ Mar 16th 2009 3:00PM

I haven't played it... But it looks like this is an example of DLC done right. We should get full fledged expansion packs as DLC. Not little individual items, unless it's a microtransaction based game to begin with.

Longhorn4Life (PSN MariusElijah) @ Mar 16th 2009 3:07PM

Its almost done right, 360 exclusive ruins it

Kyle @ Mar 16th 2009 3:33PM

Why did he get down voted for that? He's right, surely it's better for everyone if it's available on both formats. That's a no-brainer.

Snowblind @ Mar 16th 2009 4:01PM

I tend to vote him down without even reading his posts anymore.
Saves time.

Paul Z @ Mar 16th 2009 3:06PM

I bought the DLC and I don't even own the GAME!!!

baby sea tuna @ Mar 16th 2009 3:08PM

Uh, why?

Longhorn4Life (PSN MariusElijah) @ Mar 16th 2009 3:09PM

LOOSERR!!!!

Deeznuts420 @ Mar 16th 2009 3:16PM

we at least you can go outside and ride your wheel-less bike, and then right after eat a bun with a cup of ice.

baby sea tuna @ Mar 16th 2009 3:17PM

"How much fo one rib?"

arrrgh @ Mar 16th 2009 5:40PM

lol you guys are great

Heimbachae @ Mar 16th 2009 3:22PM

SS (solid state (please try to keep up with me)) will never catch on for one reason... if it tanks YOU'RE EFF-ED (see what i did there?). now, i download games just as much as anyone, but thinking that games will soley go there is absurd. one lightning storm and your hard drive goes bye bye... then what?? SOL, FML, GTG!!!

Marty @ Mar 16th 2009 3:29PM

I'm no proponent of SSD, and I'm not sure why you even brought it up here, but I don't agree with you. SSD is just as susceptible to failures during a power surge as regular HDD's, but with current HDD's, you have the added "bonus" of mechanical failure after a given amount of time / use as well. And SSD has a (very high) limited number of writes.

The bottom line is that if you're looking for a permanent storage solution, you're not going to find that in either technology.

Heimbachae @ Mar 16th 2009 3:46PM

Okay tit for tat. What I was saying was any hard drive will fail. There, you feel better? And btw I said SS not SSD, read before you comment.

Mike @ Mar 16th 2009 4:21PM

Woah, woah, slow down champ. If your HD gets fried then you replace it re-download the games you have paid for...pretty simple.

Also, what the hell were you referring to when you said "SS (solid state)" if it wasn't SSD (solid-state disks)?? Maybe you just have no idea what you're talking about.

Ordeith @ Mar 16th 2009 4:57PM

I know with Sony you are SOL.

but both Steam and XBLM allow you to download any item you purchased at any time.

So you redownload. no big deal.

Heimbachae @ Mar 16th 2009 5:16PM

ok i'll go slow. what do you think hard drives use? crayons? unicorns? no, they use disks that get written on by a stationary arm which hold SS data. SSDs or solid state drives do the same thing without the physical arm. i don't know logistics, but i know how things work. and i knew about solid state 2 years ago when i was training out at penn state. what were you doing 2 years ago? i tell you one thing you weren't doing, even thinking about SS. prob picking your nose or something, i dunno what kids do these days, so just back off unless you got proof otherwise. AND I KNOW there are a dozen kinds of hard drives so don't get on my ass about that. it's just like cars, they all do the same thing, each just does it a little differently. ok, go run off now.

Ordeith @ Mar 16th 2009 5:31PM

Heimbachae:

Go back to school, you learned it wrong.

Try again.

arrrgh @ Mar 16th 2009 5:43PM

Heimbachae

are you joking?

ever use a CARTRIDGE? Flash cart? USB Key? Anything?

ALL SOLID STATE. Very old tech

It is just now becoming financially feasible for high capacity mass produced storage solutions.

Teph @ Mar 16th 2009 5:50PM

Yeah, I'm voting for 'he didn't know what he was talking about'.

As to comment on the point Heimbachae was so horribly trying to make... I don't really see the point. A cd/dvd/brd is just as susceptible to damage as any harddisc, just to different kinds. Both have their advantages/disadvantages.

Personally I think it's fine to have a choice. If you'd rather have that physical media, I don't see why that's a big deal. I see why that could be important to you and I think it's reasonable for you to have that right. If you don't care for the media and love the convenience of downloading your gaming content... excellent! I think that's great as well.

I think the only argument that could be made is for overhead. Which is more expensive for the companies? Storing the data on server farms for 10-50 years or printing manuals and burning discs... packaging, shipping, etc? Which is cheaper for the consumer?

I think some savings should be passed to the consumer if possible when they download games, since they are literally 'getting less' with the lack of a box and printed manual, etc... but I would also understand (since I seem to be one of the few gamers that recognize that the industry is a BUSINESS) if the factors weigh in more evenly and it didn't make sense to do that.
(this isn't to say I think one is cheaper than the other.... I mean, really... I honestly don't know. And I don't think all my guessing could ever move me farther from my ignorance... but I IF it truly costs the same I don't see the problem with the cost staying the same.)

On one hand you can trust yourself to keep up with the physical media, and with proper care it could last for decades, or you could "get less" in exchange for the ability to download it anytime you want (provided the service still exists).

The last point made in parenthesis I think is what scares most people... but I think any service that makes enough money and services enough people probably won't have that issue.
But maybe that's just /my/ opinion.

Vcize @ Mar 16th 2009 6:09PM

Heimbachae, perhaps instead of spending all your time telling other people to do research, you should do some of your own. Then maybe you'll realize that with most digital distribution services you can re-download the stuff you've purchased at any time. So if you lose it via a drive failure, you just download it again on your new drive.

Which pretty much renders your point moot, and makes you look like an ass at the same time.

Sorry.

Heimbachae @ Mar 16th 2009 6:12PM

well everyones seemed to be ganging up on little old me, only reading what i'm writing and not really thinking about the thoughts i'm trying to provoke. congrats guys, you've made no point what so ever. i'm gonna go over here now and cry about how stupid i seem to be. tell your moms i said hello boys.

Vcize @ Mar 16th 2009 6:34PM

I think it's clear that you're the one that's made no point, given that the point you were trying to make was that if your drive crashes you're SOL, whereas the truth of the matter is that these services just let you re-download the stuff again.

TheWatchmen09 @ Mar 16th 2009 3:22PM

360 Exclusive FTW!

Suck on that you jealous sony fanboys...

Hopefully that means more publishers/companies will release good stuff for 360 owners.

sqela @ Mar 16th 2009 3:29PM

spoken from the man with a mario avatar

baby sea tuna @ Mar 16th 2009 3:34PM

To be fair, I think they reset the avatar every time the user gets banned. Ain't that right, Sprinkles?

Kodros @ Mar 16th 2009 4:00PM

"360 Exclusive FTW!"

So, Microsoft paid Rockstar 25 million for this episode of DLC and it's only brought in 21 million so far. Yes...Exclusive FTW indeed.

Snowblind @ Mar 16th 2009 4:31PM

I don't think MS cared so much about making back the money from it. The point was to sway people from seeing GTA as a Playstation brand, and for many multi console owners, including myself, the exclusive DLC was certainly a selling factor.

Besides, even if it doesn't make back the $25 million, the second episode could easily make up for it.

Lost and the Damned is really good, easily better than the actual game, I was very hesitant to buy it at first, as I didn't enjoy much of GTAIV, but after I actually got to play it I loved it. I definitely won't be holding out on buying the next one.

Wise Guy @ Mar 16th 2009 4:39PM

@ Kodros

"360 Exclusive FTW!"

So, Microsoft paid Rockstar 25 million for this episode of DLC and it's only brought in 21 million so far. Yes...Exclusive FTW indeed....

You failed!!! MS supposedly paid $25 million for DLC. They still have episode 2 coming out.

Lord Negatron @ Mar 16th 2009 4:43PM

@ Kodros

"So, Microsoft paid Rockstar 25 million for this episode of DLC and it's only brought in 21 million so far. Yes...Exclusive FTW indeed."

Yeah your right, since the DLC only costs $1 dollar per, MS is really getting burned here, what the hell were they thinking!?

arrrgh @ Mar 16th 2009 5:45PM

lol...oh kodros, i guess all future sales have been indefinitely halted?

kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk....

Vcize @ Mar 16th 2009 6:07PM

Kodros, if they break even on it (which it looks like they will) then it's a big, big win because the main purpose was to sway people to buy the 360 version of a game that's typically associated with the Playstation brand. So at that point, all those swayed sales become pure profit in the DLC endeavor.

Look at the ratio of GTA4 sales on the 360 vs. PS3 compared to other games that were previously playstation exclusives. Devil May Cry 4, for instance, actually sold more copies on the PS3 even with its smaller install base because it is traditionally thought of as a playstation franchise. GTA4 broke that mold, partially because of the DLC.

Kodros @ Mar 16th 2009 6:43PM

"You failed!!! MS supposedly paid $25 million for DLC. They still have episode 2 coming out."

No, you failed. They paid 50 Million for 2 episodes.

"Yeah your right, since the DLC only costs $1 dollar per, MS is really getting burned here, what the hell were they thinking!?"

I don't quite understand your point.

"lol...oh kodros, i guess all future sales have been indefinitely halted?"

No, of course not. But I really doubt that DLC for a year old game is going to have long legs.

Besides, that wasn't my point. Rockstar would have easily made more then the 25 million that MS gave them if they didn't keep it exclusive. IMO, good investment on Microsofts part, not so good for Rockstar.

Kodros @ Mar 16th 2009 6:52PM

Vcize - Besides the small percentage of people that read gaming blogs/magazines, how would the normal person know that GTA4 was getting exclusive DLC? I don't remember seeing any ads mentioning it. I understand what MS was trying to do but I don't think they did it well. As for Devil May Cry 4, Japan loves that game and of course they are going to buy it for for a PS3 instead of a 360.