F.Scofield said:
Maybe it's not mocking but definitely is playing with data here, i don't know if people has short memory or what but it's pretty easy, just go to the vgcharts page and check EVERY single zelda game and it's first month numbers, Zelda was never a front loaded franchise as people are painting it to be here, it always had decent but humble numbers compared to other nintendo franchises, just look at the npd numbers, it sold 900k on switch during an entire month, it's a record within zelda sales but if you compare to other franchises from nintendo it's not even an impressive number What makes zelda selling good is it's legs, so yeah, taking a game that was never front loaded and on a console supply constrained isn't a good comparison, maybe in a year we'll have the larger picture but using zelda to praise horizon sales is just...a better comparison to horizon would be ghost recon but when we compare a REAL front loaded franchise both horizon and zelda sales looks mediocre compared to it. |
Wait.....it is not even playing with data. Who ever said Zelda was front loaded lol? Literally NO ONE has said that or even made that out to be the case, The only thing this thread and the OP said was that it was surprising(and it is) that a brand new franchise that is unproven. Did better first week than a game that is as big as Zelda. How is that in anyway or form playing with data or acting as if Zelda was front loaded? Heck again MOST people didn't even think that Horizon would sell lifetime what it sold in under 2 weeks. So add that to the fact that it outdid Zelda FW then it was surprising and impressive. And that is all the OP said.
Also yes the Switch was supply constrained but there were about 13 million Wii U users so we can't just ignore them.
The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...
PSN: StlUzumaki23