Friday, June 15th 2012

Diablo 3 Tops Sales Charts for May

The games market went to Hell in May. Diablo III topping retail software sales for the month, according to the latest sales figures from NPD, and helped fuel a resurgence in the PC games space. Other top performers included Max Payne 3, which launched the same day as Diablo III, as well as Sniper Elite V2 and Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier.
While action titles continued their dominance of the top 10, 2K Sports' NBA 2K12 held the fifth spot for the second straight week. Blizzard continued to show its impact in the PC market with Diablo III at number 1, the first time since July 2010 that a PC-only title has accomplished that feat. The game that did it in 2010? StarCraft 2, another Blizzard mainstay.

Total video game sales continued to shrink, down 28 percent from last year. However, the PC market jumped 230 percent from the same time last year to $80 million, fueled by Diablo III sales. The overall spend in May, including digital sales and microtransactions was estimated to be $1.17 billion.


Here is the full list:

Top 10 Games (New Physical Retail only; across all platforms including PC)

Diablo III (PC)
Max Payne 3 (360, PS3, PC)
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier (360, PS3)
Prototype 2 (360, PS3)
NBA 2K12 (360, PS3, Wii, PSP, PS2, PC)
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (360, PS3, Wii, PC)
Sniper Elite V2 (360, PS3)
Battlefield 3 (360, PS3, PC)
Dragon's Dogma (360, PS3)
Just Dance 3 (Wii, 360, PS3)

Major titles that have dropped off the list from last month include Mass Effect 3, Kinect Star Wars and The Witcher 2.
Add your own comment

65 Comments on Diablo 3 Tops Sales Charts for May

#1
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
Blizzard didn't get the memo that PC gaming was dead.
Posted on Reply
#2
Crap Daddy
by: TheMailMan78
Blizzard didn't get the memo that PC gaming was dead.
No, but they got the Activision memo stating that no full PC game shall be sold at less than 50 Euros.
Posted on Reply
#3
AphexDreamer
This game got my heavy console gaming friends to fork out the money on parts for me to build them PC gaming machines. And for that I thank it.

FINALLY LAN's!
I've been telling them about the glory of PC gaming but nooooo...

One was like "We didn't listen!"
Posted on Reply
#4
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
by: Crap Daddy
No, but they got the Activision memo stating that no full PC game shall be sold at less than 50 Euros.
In all honesty man 59 bucks is a steal for a game. I paid 49.99 for games back in 1985 when they were a LOT cheaper to make. If they upped the price for inflation to todays prices we would be paying like 120 bucks per game. I agree it sucks as a consumer. I'm with ya on that. But when you get down to brass tacts 59 bucks is a damn good deal.
Posted on Reply
#5
Kreij
Senior Monkey Moderator
Given the total number of hours you can play in some PC games, it's still the cheapest form of entertainment (per hour) around.
Posted on Reply
#6
Prima.Vera
Not everybody is earning 5000$/month you know....
Posted on Reply
#7
Kreij
Senior Monkey Moderator
I don't either ... what's your point, Prima?
Posted on Reply
#8
atikkur
PC gaming is always about gloriness. Its user base is huge (10millions and maybe more), so if devs can make the right game in the right time and the right specs.. will always booming in pc gaming.
Posted on Reply
#9
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
by: TheMailMan78
In all honesty man 59 bucks is a steal for a game. I paid 49.99 for games back in 1985 when they were a LOT cheaper to make. If they upped the price for inflation to todays prices we would be paying like 120 bucks per game. I agree it sucks as a consumer. I'm with ya on that. But when you get down to brass tacts 59 bucks is a damn good deal.
Yea, I remember paying $69.99 plus tax.. for carts back in the mid 90's...
Posted on Reply
#10
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
by: Mindweaver
Yea, I remember paying $69.99 plus tax.. for carts back in the mid 90's...
I paid 99 bucks for Virtual Racer!
Due to the complexity of the Model 1 board, a home console version seemed unlikely, until 1994 when a cartridge design incorporating the Sega Virtua Processor on an extra chip was created to enable a version on the Mega Drive/Genesis. It was more expensive than other games, initially retailing at £70 in the United Kingdom and US$100 in the United States. Despite being severely scaled down, it was still technically impressive, and was very well received by reviewers.
Posted on Reply
#11
Prima.Vera
by: Kreij
I don't either ... what's your point, Prima?
Point is that for me 60$ is not a steal, but very pricey from my point of view, especially for a such a crappy game.
60$ for a game is not the same for people earning 600$/month and 6000$/month. So please, let's not generalize things here...
Posted on Reply
#12
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
by: Prima.Vera
Point is that for me 60$ is not a steal, but very pricey from my point of view, especially for a such a crappy game.
60$ for a game is not the same for people earning 600$/month and 6000$/month. So please, let's not generalize things here...
If you can't afford a 60 dollar game then the price is not your problem. Its your income. Also who says you MUST buy a game a month? For example I bought D3 and now cannot afford BF3 Premium. What do I do? I save money until I can. I don't complain "OMGBBQ EA IS RIPPING EVERYONE OFF WITH PRICEORZ!" No. The price is fair. I just cannot afford it right now.
Posted on Reply
#13
Mindweaver
Moderato®™
by: TheMailMan78
I paid 99 bucks for Virtual Racer!
yea, I remember the 32x it was awesome at the time or at least they made it sound awesome.. lol Kind of like the sega CD... Hehehe I had cliffhanger for it and it looked kickass on tv.. but the actual game was horrible.. lol

I'm ready to play some Diablo 3... The family and I are at the beach and have been for the past week. My little Dell D620 with it's little nv110 wont play D3.. But i do have diablo 2 installed on it and have been playing it some... not a lot we have been in the pool... hehehe or I mean the lazy river... lol it's great.. I don't even have to paddle..lol for some reason floating on an air tube and drinking beer is very stress free... lol oh back to subject... I can't wait for prototype 2! If anyone hasn't played the first one then you need too... Welp got to run.. I have a shallow pool of water with a current calling me with the force of beer! :toast: :rockout:

by: Prima.Vera
especially for a such a crappy game.
If you can not afford the game.. How can you say it is crappy?
Posted on Reply
#14
Totally
In response to the poll, regrettably YES, the always online is just horrible. Every time I happen to want to play servers are offline or I need to wait in a que.


by: TheMailMan78
In all honesty man 59 bucks is a steal for a game. I paid 49.99 for games back in 1985 when they were a LOT cheaper to make. If they upped the price for inflation to todays prices we would be paying like 120 bucks per game. I agree it sucks as a consumer. I'm with ya on that. But when you get down to brass tacts 59 bucks is a damn good deal.
Posted on Reply
#15
Jizzler
Luckily when games started to breach the $49 ceiling, it also became easier to find used games thanks to internet auction sites popping up around this time.

Prices today seem to drop quickly, so I buy new a lot of the time - it's just happens to be 6 months after release :)

Blizzard games may not drop to crazy low prices like games from other developers but they will drop. That's when I'd like to pick up D3, not because I think the current price isn't worth it (it is), but because I have some other games I'd like to get through. Currently that game is Fallout: New Vegas. It can be picked up for under $20 right now, or under $40 for the Ultimate edition. Not your cup of tea? Many many other great games available for cheap (and they run well on lesser video cards/CPUs).
Posted on Reply
#16
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
by: Totally

Tell me how much it cost to develop a game back then compared to today? :rolleyes: ;)

by: Jizzler
Luckily when games started to breach the $49 ceiling, it also became easier to find used games thanks to internet auction sites popping up around this time.

Prices today seem to drop quickly, so I buy new a lot of the time - it's just happens to be 6 months after release :)

Blizzard games may not drop to crazy low prices like games from other developers but they will drop. That's when I'd like to pick up D3, not because I think the current price isn't worth it (it is), but because I have some other games I'd like to get through. Currently that game is Fallout: New Vegas. It can be picked up for under $20 right now, or under $40 for the Ultimate edition. Not your cup of tea? Many many other great games available for cheap (and they run well on lesser video cards/CPUs).
THE COMMON SENSE AND LOGIC!!!!!!! IT BURNZ!!!!!

by: Totally
In response to the poll, regrettably YES, the always online is just horrible. Every time I happen to want to play servers are offline or I need to wait in a que.
You must have crappy servers in your area because Ive had ONE issue since I got the game and I have over 50 hours in.
Posted on Reply
#17
Kreij
Senior Monkey Moderator
I think D3 is awesome and a lot of fun.
I've got about 175 hours in (due to being home sick a lot at the moment), so that means I'm right now at about 35¢ an hour for my D3 entertainment.

The only thing I can think of that's cheaper is sitting on the deck watching the bug zapper ... but that requires copious amounts of beer which substantially increases the per hour price.

@Prima : So wait until it comes down in price or try to win a copy in a TPU game contest if one pops up. Always more than one way to skin a cat. :toast:

@TMM : I still have a bunch of stuff for your Barbarian. ;)
Posted on Reply
#18
Totally
by: TheMailMan78
Tell me how much it cost to develop a game back then compared to today? :rolleyes: ;)
That's what I'm asking you because you're making the claim, and don't forget to adjust for inflation.
Posted on Reply
#19
Prima.Vera
@Mindweaver

I already bought the game, played, and I think it was a waste of money

@Postman

Easy to talk, when you are not living in countries that the average income is less than 500$...
Posted on Reply
#20
D007
by: AphexDreamer
This game got my heavy console gaming friends to fork out the money on parts for me to build them PC gaming machines. And for that I thank it.

FINALLY LAN's!
I've been telling them about the glory of PC gaming but nooooo...

One was like "We didn't listen!"
This game and heavy console don't seem to mix.. Very basic graphics.. Could play it on a laptop I bet.. To build a gaming pc for Diablo 3 is Lolable..

I still think the game sucks tbh.. diablo 2 had me forever.. This game bored me to tears day 1..
The only people who care are RMT's.. That's all the game is good for imo.. Yay log on find someting and try to sell it.. That's not a game, that's ebay..
Posted on Reply
#22
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
by: Prima.Vera
@Mindweaver

I already bought the game, played, and I think it was a waste of money

@Postman

Easy to talk, when you are not living in countries that the average income is less than 500$...
Move.
Posted on Reply
#23
Jizzler
by: TheMailMan78
THE COMMON SENSE AND LOGIC!!!!!!! IT BURNZ!!!!!
Financial logic then, necessary strategy now - whole family has grown up to be gamers! ;)
Posted on Reply
#24
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
by: Jizzler
Financial logic then, necessary strategy now - whole family has grown up to be gamers! ;)
Dude I agree with you 100%. People just love to blame "The Man" for their epic short comings. I just enjoy pointing out how they are wrong.
Posted on Reply
#25
wickerman
not only did I buy the game, I bought the collector's edition :laugh: I waited 12 years for the sequel so I didn't care that I was paying $100 for it, the boxed extras are very cool even if the in game ones are a bit weak. I don't play WOW or SCII so obviously those extras are useless to me.

@ D007 as for performance, blizzard wants their games to be played by the majority of computers. They have figured out you get more players when you're not targeting enthusiasts who already have $400 graphics cards. I was surprised to find my late 2010 MacBook Air was able to run the game well enough to be called playable, despite being just a 1.8ghz core 2 duo, 4gb ddr3 1066, and geforce 320m. Even modern IGPs like Intels HD 3000 will do playable framerates at a decent resolution. AMD's APUs are ideal actually. So basically, any modern laptop or desktop you buy today should be able to play the game, even if you don't know how to properly research things. So while it's hardly as graphically intensive as Battlefield 3, the vast majority of people who buy the game wont need to do any upgrades to play it. Though anyone wanting to max it out and play their native resolution might need to, you'll want at something above a GTS 450 to do that and manage more than 30fps.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment