• Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Honestly, it’s so dishonest on all fronts that digital-only content is being thrown into these stats. Of course something only offered digitally is going to be bought digitally.

    I don’t believe for a second that Sony, Nintendo, etc. don’t have separate data for each and every category of media they sell, and so could absolutely do an apples to apples comparison of digital vs. physical sales if they actually wanted to.

    Data-driven decision making my arse. They’re driving the data.

    • TAG@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Because Nintendo did not provide these statistics (directly). This is data mined from their financial filings. Nintendo reported their total software revenue and broke it down between transactions that occurred via their digital store front and outside of it. At the surface level, Nintendo is just explaining to its investors why it is worth selling via both a first party digital store (which is a large expense I imagine) and third party stores.

      Any assumptions about physical vs. digital game sales are strictly coming from reporters pulling numbers out of context.

      • Chloé 🥕@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        but then, wouldn’t the “physical” stats also include download codes you can buy at stores? maybe those are few enough in sales to be negligible, idk

        it would also certainly include game key cards

    • slimerancher@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      While I agree, it does proves the argument that if there is content available only digitally, people will buy it.