Who gives a DAMN about their past as long as a game looks good it shouldn't matter. Also you're comparing first person shooting games to a RPG adventure game like...

Let me guess, you preorder No Mans Sky? lol.  

I'm not saying they can't make a great game, I'm saying that if a game studio has a long history of making bad games, predicting that they will suddenly make a good game is not very wise.  And at the very least you should wait to preorder until the reviews come out.

Titanfall 2 sold considerably less than Titanfall 1 even though it was on both the ps4 and xbox One and it got better reviews.  This could directly be contributed to BattleField and Cod coming out around the same time.  Zelda and Horizon are certainly different games beyond them both being openworld, but I can guarantee you that there will be an impact of sales, how big is anyones guess, but saying Zelda wont effect the sales of Horizon I do believe is false.

Titanfall 2, a shooter with heavy focus on multiplayer targeting audiences that enjoy twitch gameplay frag games (CoD) and releasing on the exact same platforms, basically the exact same demographics. That's a whole other universe and not comparable at all.

My point was that it's possible.

Why will two widely different concepts, whose primary shared trait is being open world, on two widely different consoles and with different demographics, affect one another? Did Gears of War affect Uncharted or vice versa? They're both 3rd person shooters, right? And the Xbox - PS demographic is quite similar to boot. It just doesn't work that way and there really aren't any good arguments for it.

Bloodbourne got amazing reviews, but sold only 2.5 million.  I mean technically it's possible for Horizon to sell more due to a larger install base, but lets be real, Consumers will buy a 300 dollar console just for zelda.

Dark Souls 2 sold about 2 million and has a 91 metascore, this is a series that doesn't have huge general appeal. Bloodborne did quite well for what it is, and is certainly a much more niche title and concept, especially with the difficulty curve of these games. Whether or not "consumers" are willing to spend 300$ for Zelda alone has no bearing on Horizon and its potential sales, there is no connection between thinking Horizon might sell well and thinking consumers are willing to pay 300$ for a Zelda console. Also; I'm not so sure that a huge number of people are willing to pay 300$ for a console for one game alone, even if it's Zelda.

I think you're getting a bit to emotional on that, I never directly refuted a point.  You shouldn't assume that's what I was doing, in fact don't assume at all, if I make a point and you agree with it, just say you agree no need to continue to comment about it.

Emotional? What, you think it made me cry or something? Also, when you quote DanneSandin, who in turn had quoted me and start the post with; "You guys do realize we're talking about Nintendo and Guerilla games.", how are we to think that this isn't a point pertaining to us, exactly? And, like I asked (and you "niftly" dodged); why make it at all if it had no bearing on what the two of us were actually discussing? How about saying "That may have been poorly formulated and formatted" rather than claiming it made me "emotional" (I don't even know what that's supposed to mean) and ask me not to comment on it. "Yes, I said this but you shouldn't comment on it and I wasn't talking to/about you despite aiming it directly at you", can you at least see how that's a little confusing?If you quote someone and start the post by directly adressing them, anyone would assume that you're talking to or about them, or do you have a habbit of making statements to a room full of people while singling out one individual in a corner? Adress someone behind your back by making eye contact with someone facing you instead? It's common sense, really.

You also seem to suggest that Zelda relasing one week after Horizon will affect its sales, which makes very little sense regardless, at least for week one (which is alway the biggest week).

Witcher 2 was already a well established game selling almost 4 million.  Witcher 3 selling 6 million isn't all that surprising.

The Witcher 2 sold less than one million on the 360, it didn't release for PS3 and The Witcher series was quite small on consoles overall. Meanwhile, The Witcher 3 has sold over 4 million on PS4 alone, about 4.5 times as much, that's a breakout hit in a previosuly established series. And, as mentioned, it's made by a studio with very little pedigree and no previous big hits under their belts. Horizon might well sell 5 million or more, it's not that unrealistic, and the sales of Killzone games can't be used to correctly measure the potential sales of a new IP with an entirely different concept and in a different genre with much less intense comeptition.