July NPD: Hardware sales slide, Wii Sports Resort soars

by Randy Nelson { Aug 13th 2009 at 9:40PM }

By now, you're already aware that Wii Sports Resort sold more than 500k copies in the US alone during July. Who would ever have thought that a Wii Sports sequel would do so well? Despite the game's success, the platform it calls home saw a 30% drop-off in sales for the month. In fact, see all that red down there? Sales of every console were down.

-DS: 539K

227K (-29%)
-Wii: 253K

108K (-30%)
-Xbox 360: 203K

37K (-15%)
-PSP: 123K

41K (-25%)
-PS3: 122K

42K (-25%)
-PS2: 108K

45K (-29%

Check out the software sales chart after the break.

Wii Sports Resort (w/ Wii Motion Plus) - WII - Nintendo - 508K
NCAA Football 10 - 360 - EA - 377K
NCAA Football 10 - PS3 - EA - 237K
Wii Fit (w/ Balance Board) - WII - Nintendo - 164K
Mario Kart (w/ Wheel) - WII - Nintendo - 157K
Mario Kart DS - NDS - Nintendo - 132K
Pokemon Platinum Version - NDS - Nintendo - 116K
Fight Night Round 4 - 360 - EA - 116K
New Super Mario Bros. - NDS - Nintendo - 102K
EA Sports Active - WII - EA - 97K

* Includes Collector's, Limited and Bundled Editions

Tags: microsoft, nintendo, npd, npd-monthly, sales, sony, wii-sports-resort

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Moptimus Slime (The Innocent Ace) @ Aug 13th 2009 9:44PM

seeing as how they announced it sold over 500,000 copies around the end of July/beginning of August, that number isn't surprising

Ridgecity @ Aug 14th 2009 12:38AM

it was released July 26.

Better scratch "innocent" and write "uninformed" instead.

Avatar (Steam: tmawds) @ Aug 14th 2009 4:17AM

Pretty sure that falls under the end of July. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

-Vexx- @ Aug 13th 2009 9:46PM

Every console?

You sure?

WELL THEN THAT MEANS 2600 SALES SHOULD BE PICKING UP SOON!

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH

Kleptomaniac @ Aug 13th 2009 9:47PM

Ouch now thats a bad month for sony!

Rob S. @ Aug 13th 2009 10:00PM

It's a bad month for everyone, but Sony started out lower so it hurts more. They really should just let the ball drop and announce the price cut.

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 10:13PM

**says with voice raising** hey at least the PSP & PS2 are PURE Profit....

sheppyboy @ Aug 13th 2009 11:04PM

Actually, with cost of PS3 down 70%, PS3 SHOULD be pure profit now too.

"But Sheppy, how did you reach that incredible number?" Well, simple really. If we assume Sony is cutting even at $400, that means $400 is 30% of launch cost per unit. This means 10% of that cost is $133.33 So if we assume Sony is cutting even with $400, that means at launch, Sony was paying $1333.33 for every PS3 they made. Simply put, those numbers are impossible. Which means, of course, that PS3 is now profits too, which lends more credence to the price drop rumors.

Glenn @ Aug 13th 2009 11:37PM

I can't say I'm surprised - afterall, the slim + a price cut are both incoming. Everyone's waiting for that.

Wes @ Aug 14th 2009 1:10AM

@SheppyBoy
70% cheaper to manufactuer than at launch? Source? Preferably something provided by Sony as opposed to a third party or analyst speculation?

sonicspike41 @ Aug 14th 2009 1:12AM

@sheppboy

That made absolutely no sense.

In November 2006 Sony was losing $240 per 60gb system sold. 60gb msrp $599.

In December 2008 Sony was losing $50 per 80gb system sold. 80gb msrp $399

Now costs have been cut 70% which roughly translates to the system costing them about $250 or so to make.

They may not be getting as many sells as they were last year, but they sure as hell aren't losing that much money. It's safe to say they're holding out on the price cut announcement for a major event (like the one taking place next Tuesday) so that they can recoup as much of the money they lost as possible before then and get rid of a few older models in the process.

sonicspike41 @ Aug 14th 2009 1:28AM

@wes,

http://www.totalvideogames.com/PlayStation-3/news/PS3-Manufacturing-Costs-Reduced-By-70-14439.html
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/07/31/rumor-ps3s-now-70-percent-cheaper-to-manufacture/
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=24659

Wes @ Aug 14th 2009 1:57AM

@SonicSpike11

I agree with your calculations that the original lost on the $599.99 was $240.00 thus making the total price $841 give or take to produce and following suit the current cost of manufacturing being $252. Somehow, 252 seems a bit low though by the time you throw in the video card, hard drive, 7 cell processors(even though one can be a dud), a blu-ray drive, ethernet port, bluebooth adaptor, memory card slots, etc.

If you on the otherhand look at the xbox 360 and replace the hard drive with a flash memory unit(arcade), the blu-ray player with a dvd-player, replace the 7 cell processors with a standard intel processor, no memory card slots for sd/cf/sony/etc and no built in wireless I could very easily, see the xbox 360s manufacturing cost being a bit lower and easily at or under the $252 dollar range.

I mean, honestly, if you look at the cost of an 8x dvd player that doesn't read/write its about $8.00. If you look at the cost of a blu-ray player, its $184.99 for the Sony 2x Blu-ray reader-only model according to ncix and from newegg its $239.99 for the same model (BC-5500S) which specifications matches that of the blu-ray player in the ps3. That alone makes me think the $252 price range is a bit low. If we average ncix and neweggs costs, $210.00 of the $252.00 cost is the blu-ray drive alone. Do all the other components really only cost $42.00 to make? I never realized video cards, several processors per unit, hard drives, built in wireless cards, ethernet cards, memory card readers and other components had become so so cheap.

I have this odd feeling that since the "roughly 70%" figure was given by a CFO talking to shareholders, it might mean more like 60.1% rounding-up. Give or take. Making the cost more like $336.53. With some models of the PS3 costing $399.99, that would make their relucant nature regarding dropping their price more logical. As if you dropped that price by $50.00, you'd cut your profits from in the range of $45.00 down to $14.00 which would take a long time and many sales to recoup the losses they received when the PS3 was losing $240.00 per unit. It also seems more of a fair price estimate if the Sony blu-ray read-only drive price is reflective of what Sony allocates for the cost of the blu-ray drive in the PS3. At least that leaves about $130.00 for all the other combined components including assembly/manufacturing costs.

sonicspike41 @ Aug 14th 2009 2:28AM

I'm guessing most of the savings so far have come from taking things out.

I know blu-ray drives have become a lot cheaper, but is that because the technology is becoming more solid state like cd/dvd drives or because the early-adopters already paid their premium? Perhaps some of both?

I'd like to know what the raw cost of producing a blu-ray 2x read drive was at the PS3's launch and compare that to current ones. By "raw cost" I mean without the retail markup. Just the total money Sony put into each drive at launch and at present.

Also, I'd imagine wireless cards are pretty cheap these days. USB drives can be found on $20 mp3 players, and ethernet ports I'm sure have gotten much much cheaper. I can imagine 2 USB drives, a wireless card, and a few of the other more common components costing under $30 or so.

BlaqueBeird @ Aug 14th 2009 4:26AM

You people have no idea what you're talking about. Never, ever, ever try to run your own businesses. At least not until you learn what a calculator is for.

sho220 @ Aug 14th 2009 6:59AM

Wes said:
"If you on the otherhand look at the xbox 360 and replace the hard drive with a flash memory unit(arcade), the blu-ray player with a dvd-player, replace the 7 cell processors with a standard intel processor"

standard intel processor eh?
the 360 has a 3 core powerpc chip. which has nothing to do with intel.
the cell is ONE processor (a powerpc core) with SPEs.
also, the powerpc core of the cell and the 360's processor share many similarities.
both, the cell and the 360's processor (xenon) were designed by IBM.

just thought i'd clear up some of that confusion there for ya.

Sheppy (of the Fidlious Clan of Wong) @ Aug 14th 2009 7:38AM

I think you both need to reread my post. Because what you said falls directly in line with what I said. But here, let me do it again so that you can follow along.

First, Sony has NEVER confirmed costs of hardware and any "figures" are from manufacturing analysts. Often compiled by hunting for lowest price parts. So as to whether or not Sony was losing $240 when PS3 was $600, that's up in air. NOW, having said that, let's go into my comment.

Chris D's comment said, at least the PSP and PS2 are pure profit now, indicating that PS3 was still being sold at a loss. What I did there was assume the retail price indicated a cutting even point and did the math from there. You can try it at home.

You have to ASSUME that $400 represents 30% of the initial manufacturing cost. This is a common assumption that plenty of people make when talking about how bad PS3 is doing. Actually, no. Most people assume Sony is losing $100 per console. But I took the cutting eving approach.

Now whip out your calculators boys. Because if we take $400 and divide by 3, we get a representation of 10%. This would be 133.33. To arrive at the "launch price" for Sony to STILL not be making money off the console, we have to take that figure and multiply it by ten. Now look at that number... do you really think PS3 once cost Sony more than three Xbox 360 pros to make one PS3? As I stated before, those numbers are simply impossible.

Thus rendering the conclusion that Sony is NOT profiting off PS3 entirely moot.

[tre, loquacious lover of long names and anti-activision ambassador that likes alliteration)] [blogs at trespeak.tumblr.com] @ Aug 13th 2009 9:49PM

I betcha it'll double when December rolls around.

How much do I got to bet? Two dollahs.

Jack_Jackington @ Aug 13th 2009 10:33PM

i'll bet a JFK (half dollar)

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 9:50PM

Damn thats a lot of Red....

I am HOPING all that is in the Gree for the next 3 months....well except maybe the PS2 sales....

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 10:22PM

I dunno Sly...the PS3 Version has a Freebie....I seen it leading the 360 version in Sales on Amazon more than a few times...now is Amazon THE source for stuff like that?? nope...but sometimes it can be used as an indicator...

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 10:23PM

dammit.....

Jack_Jackington @ Aug 13th 2009 10:33PM

lol

Marty @ Aug 14th 2009 2:02PM

Amazon can't be considered a good source of data because it pushes some of the systems more often than others (at least, it does to me).

tmacairjordan87 @ Aug 13th 2009 9:51PM

Now that is one depressing top 10 list. Nothing but casual games and sports games, and only from 2 companies. Then again it was an extremely slow month, and I can't even recall anything decent coming out in July.

Hopefully Batman does well this month, as it's looking like it's going to be an amazing game.

Sly [Planeteer | Power of Teets & Crumpets] @ Aug 13th 2009 9:56PM

pokemon isn't casual. it's balanced between casual and hardcore. it can be one of the most casual games, or one of the most hardcore games depending on how you play it.

Fernando Rocker @ Aug 13th 2009 9:59PM

So, Mario Kart, New Super Mario Bros. and Pokemon are casual now?

Those games are casual and hardcore at the same time (I hate those fucking terms).

tmacairjordan87 @ Aug 13th 2009 9:59PM

I've played plenty of pokemon in my day and it's not that hardcore. The game can be beat with very minimal effort.

Moptimus Slime (The Innocent Ace) @ Aug 13th 2009 10:01PM

"Nothing but casual games and sports games, and only from 2 companies"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0vhGEGJC8g#t=55s

Rob S. @ Aug 13th 2009 10:02PM

Then you must be some sort of god of Pokemon, because I at least had to put in some good effort to complete the game. It didn't fell minimal I'll tell you that.

Fernando Rocker @ Aug 13th 2009 10:03PM

So, your definition of a hardcore game is a game with a hard difficulty?

tmacairjordan87 @ Aug 13th 2009 10:06PM

I know plenty of people who have kids that have beaten pokemon (most are in the 6-9 range). And these aren't kids like when I was a kid and me and my friends sat around beating Contra 3, we're talking modern era kids who can't really play anything that's considered hardcore.

Rob S. @ Aug 13th 2009 10:07PM

Tmac: I only play hardcore games for hardcore gamers such as myself.

tmacairjordan87 @ Aug 13th 2009 10:10PM

Now wait a minute, I've tried the other side before. Games like Viva Pinata, LBP, Peggle, Wii Sports.

I didn't actually enjoy playing any of them, but at least I gave the other side a try :\

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 10:10PM

Yea I'm guessing Batamn will be in the Top 5....with it going like this...

1. Madden(X360)
2. Wii Sports Resort
3. Madden (PS3)
4. Arkham Asylum(PS3)
5. Arkham Asylum(360)
6. Wii Fit
7. Madden(PS2)
8. Madden(PSP)
9. Madden(DS)
10. Mario Kart(Wii)

Sly [Planeteer | Power of Teets & Crumpets] @ Aug 13th 2009 10:14PM

aggie, switch the 360 version of arkham asylum with the PS3 version and you'll be right.

tmac, by "beat", do you mean beat the elite 4? or do you mean completing the ENTIRE pokedex? because #1 is easy, #2 is really hard.

Moptimus Slime (The Innocent Ace) @ Aug 13th 2009 10:17PM

I think tmac is really Tina Sanchez trying to infiltrate our ranks and take Joystiq down from the inside

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 10:22PM

Mr Khan @ Aug 13th 2009 10:36PM

@ Aggie.

I'd also up Madden for PS2 by a few spots, drop the DS version, and add the Wii version.

DangerMouse @ Aug 13th 2009 10:40PM

"Those games are casual and hardcore at the same time (I hate those fucking terms)."

I agree with Fernando. These terms are stupid, with it being thrown around with little to no explanation as to what they mean. If contra 3 is hardcore, should i also assume that any game over an hour long isn't? Those games were hard back then to substitute its lack of content for difficulty. It's a poor argument. Nearly every game today is built around the player enjoying the experience rather than punishing them since the player usually gets more out of the game for what they paid.

sony boy @ Aug 13th 2009 10:42PM

tmac, you have to admit, pokemon wifi battles are so fun and that makes it a perfect balance between casual and hardcore. you actually NEED strategy to beat the people online!!!

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 10:46PM

@Khan....I'd be inclined to agree with you IF the Wii Version didnt just BARELY make the top 10 last year...and now with a BIG game like Batam also on the charts it might not make it at all...even with it being "more tailored" to the Wii

http://nintendo.joystiq.com/2008/09/12/august-npd-madden-sacks-the-competition/

tmacairjordan87 @ Aug 13th 2009 10:51PM

Psh, back in my day we didn't play Pokemon with this WiFi thingy, we played it with that transfer cable connected to two game boys on the schoolbus.

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 10:54PM

TMac that was back when there was like 3 Pokemon games X-D

tmacairjordan87 @ Aug 13th 2009 11:06PM

I know....those were the days

samfish (uses the Joystiq Comment-Kill filter!) @ Aug 13th 2009 11:13PM

"So, your definition of a hardcore game is a game with a hard difficulty?"

And yet, he's never played God Hand and always bangs on about how he hates Ninja Gaiden.

@Aggie:
Switch slots 4 and 5 and drop the PSP and DS versions of Madden. There's no way those are charting. I'm going to agree with Khan and say put the Wii version of Madden in there. Probably at #10. Or maybe #9 and Wii Play will sneak back into the top 10 again.

Sly [Planeteer | Power of Teets & Crumpets] @ Aug 13th 2009 11:49PM

samfish, thanks for the assist. aggie, i'm telling you, no matter what the bonuses are, and no matter what the amazon sales are at, the 360 version will outsell the PS3 version. the PS3 version outselling the 360 version is like wolfenstein outselling madden. well... you get the idea.

Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 13th 2009 11:59PM

you guys are most likely right.....lol...but hell even if it does sell more I dont see it being more than a few thousand...make 20k at the most

Sly [Planeteer | Power of Teets & Crumpets] @ Aug 14th 2009 12:08AM

you're right. the difference won't be too big. the exclusive DLC might help the PS3 version quite a bit. probably not enough to surpass 360 sales, but still very good.

sonicspike41 @ Aug 14th 2009 2:53AM

If the two were equal I'd probably buy the 360 version for the built in internet features (party chat, messages, etc.). Most of my friends only have a 360, so every time I buy a PS3 game I have to consider the options.

This time though they are offering free DLC for the PS3, so I think the choice is clear. I just hope it isn't a timed-exclusive DLC.

| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 50 Comments