But that's exactly why it should have sold better. it IS a launch game. You seem to think that simply mentioning it's a launch game entails an argument for why it only did 2.3 million, but in my mind well reviewed launch games that are interesting and unique and come off a popular series should probably sell way better than Dead Rising 3 did. it's not like it was just left in the 10$ gaming bin at Walmart, for like 3years it was on Xbox One shelves. Launch games are a case by case thing, sometimes being a launch game causes death to games, sometimes it makes them blossom. Everything was in Dead rising 3's corner, which is why I'm suprised it didn't sell better. Again, I'm not taking anything away from it - it sold really well. I don't know why you're trying to push so much for it to be considered impressive, you aren't an executive of Xbox dude.

This isn't how legs work. I feel like you just read my comment talking about "good legs" and then just tried to reverse it into an argument about Gears of War 4. Gears of War 1 was unproven, so when positive reviews came out and it became one of t he most popular multiplayer games of all time, people jumped in! With Gears of War 2 and 3, a lot of the sales came from the first few months because the fanbase was already established. Because of this, their legs were technically "worse". Like looking at Gears of War 2, it had 500k less sales it's second year than Gears of War 1, and 400k less on it's 3rd year. This was even more true for Gears 3, although it launched like 2 months before those games(just like Gears 4 which launched a month before 1 and couldn't match it's first year sales physically). Gears of War 4 already has an established fanbase, it should have sold massively it's first few months. It didn't. It's not going to magically get the best legs in Gears of War history simply because "Gears of War has good legs". Yeah, they do, but moree people should have bought it in it's first year. Because of this , even accounting for digital, there's allmost no way Gears of War 4 can get to 6 million. It's not going to have the legs of Gears of War 1, and considering it's install base was so small initially, it's not going to match 2 or 3 in sales. It has an established franchise, it's on a console that has a bigger install base than the Xbox 360 in the same time frame, and even with much bigger digital sales, it can't account for it's bad initial launch. 

"The sales are lower but Halo isnt as big as it used to be "

...yes...this is ... literally what I'm saying? I don't know how you clarifying that helps your point.

It's not exaggerating. Look man, I'm trying to be reasonable here but I've clarified this twice and I'm going to clarify it one last time. I know you like Xbox but like damn. 5 million sales in 3 months is great for a triple A game, it's great for almost any game, but it's not great for certain franchises, and it's certainly not great for Halo. Halo 3 sold 8.1 million units in 3 months on a smaller install base(from what I understand it's not significantly smaller, but still). Halo Reach and Halo 4 sold 5 million in a month. You resorted to using an overpriced side game that was lambasted by users and online reviewers when it originally came out to show Halo 5 "performing strong". You can call a donkey a turtle but it's still an ass. Halo 5's sales are better than a lot of games out there, but in an era where Splatoon 2 and Playerunknown's Battlegrounds are matching it or even outperforming, I'm not going to jump for joy at 5 million in 3 months. It's mediocre. Maybe "extremely mediocre" is an overstatement for other franchises, but for Halo? No. It was Microsoft's 3D Mario. And I know I already brought this up, but if a 3D Mario, or you know ... if an Uncharted game sold 2 million in 3 months would people be jumping for joy? No. It's mediocre for the series. 

" Rare replay includes a bunch of xbox 360 games that Rare made for xbox"

It was a joke, dear. 

"The game sales wise is lower than past Halos but it could end up beating Halo 1 and ODSt which is decent."

Decent is somethig I'd use for mediocre sales figures

"so i dont know how that doesnt speak "xbox brand"

Well because I was talking about what Microsoft was releasing as "heavy hitters" or "big games" on the Xbox One, and to try and diminish my argument you guys brought up an indie and compilation disk. Like it's totally fine if they sell well, but they're not exactly the core of Xbox. Ori is getting there though. Like I have no problem if you say "Hey, these xbox  games sold well!" but those weren't the kind of games I was addressing.

"Ori is on steam too so its not really just an xbox thing."

...and you continue to make my argument for me : P I think you might be getting a bit confused no offense

Its a launch games it has a limited audience to sell to. at the end of 2013 around 26% of XBO owners owned a physical copy of Dead Rising 3. Considering that dead rising games arent thaty big and that for most casual gamers that picked up an XBO in 2013 they are most likely to go with bigger IPs like COD,BF, Madden,FIFA and Forza than to buy Dead Rising. Hell RYSE was probably an even better option for some people because it was a better game to showcase the power of the XBO than dead rising. And the game had had pretty good legs afterward. Physical wise it has sold more copies from 2014-and beyond than it did in its holiday launch. For a smaller series it did really well.

Gears 3 legs werent as great as the other Gears game but i think its because a lot of sales came earler because it launched before the holiday 2011. Gears 4 also did launch a few weeks before the holidays but if MS can continue the support for the game, and give it pricecuts i think it will eventually get to 6 million. Also the game looks to take advantage of the Xbox One X so it could be a popular benchmark game. Theres a chance that it might not reach that 6 million but i doubt it will be a huge drop for the series,

Halo 5 selling 5 million in 3 months is lower than other Halo games dont get me wrong. But if it hasnt by now it could outsell Halo ODST and Halo 1 which imo doesnt seem "extremely mediocre" for the series. Also not to mention that its one of the most active Halos and had made lots of money for MS and 343 so ira definitly a financial success. Splatoon 2 outsold Halo 5 in japan but i doubt it will outperform it. Battlegrounds is a new hit game. Its already outsold the XB1 version of CO IW, and AW, and BF1. Also FIFA, madden etc.

Oh by your first post you didnt specify that you meant heavy hitters or big games so i just mentioned games that were xbox eclusive.

I wasnt trying to argue your statement that "Im probably forgetting some but I feel thats fairly accurate. I just think Ori and Rare dont reflect Xbox at all". I just never heard that said before lol so i wanted more of an explanation.

Yeah. Those Dead Rising 4 sales too are just awful.

Street Fighter 5 only fail because it went Sony only, those Sony fans just wanted the game to be an exclusive they did not care to buy it, they just wanted to say they have one more exclsuive overy Xbox and Nintendo. In the end, Capcom just hurt themselves the most, no one taking the Street Fighter brand seriously after making it a sony only, and now everyone is getting their fighting fixes else where. As you can see every other fighting game selling more than Street Fighter, and I bet you Arms will pass Street Fighter also, if it do not its because Splatoon got release way too close to it, so its sales number will drop until people tire out from Splatoon and need something to change up. 

I knew this would happen to Street Fighter 5, but Capcom needed to learn a lesson, and all the sony fans who claim they wanted the game will try to put some type of blame on why they did not get it. It is street fighter, how do you not get it. The way I see how things work from my short time years ago selling games, sony fans want exclusives but the games they mostly buy is games that are multiplatform, most times because they want to talk about the game with their friend who own another system, if they both do not own a ps4, they are less likely to pick up street fighter 5. 

I hope Nintendo and Microsoft tell Capcom no on bringing their next street fighter to their system, let the brand die because of their stupidity to make it sony exclusive. Guilty Gear say they bringing some fighting games the Switch way, so Switch will be good no need for Capcom,.....if I am not mistaken Capcom vs Tatsunko for Wii which was one of my favorite probably sold as much as street fighter 5 or more

If a game sells over 2 million copies and still has great legs that is impressive if can't see that as impressive then you are clueless about games.

Not really since the X1 only has 1/3 of the install base the 360 had so you have to multiply the X1 titles by three to have a fair comperison plus this generation there are a lot more digital copies being sold so you don't know the real numbers of any of those games.  On the 360 most people only bought physical games especially at the beginning when most people only had a 20GB or 60GB HDD.

But that's exactly why it should have sold better. it IS a launch game. You seem to think that simply mentioning it's a launch game entails an argument for why it only did 2.3 million, but in my mind well reviewed launch games that are interesting and unique and come off a popular series should probably sell way better than Dead Rising 3 did. it's not like it was just left in the 10$ gaming bin at Walmart, for like 3years it was on Xbox One shelves. Launch games are a case by case thing, sometimes being a launch game causes death to games, sometimes it makes them blossom. Everything was in Dead rising 3's corner, which is why I'm suprised it didn't sell better. Again, I'm not taking anything away from it - it sold really well. I don't know why you're trying to push so much for it to be considered impressive, you aren't an executive of Xbox dude.

This isn't how legs work. I feel like you just read my comment talking about "good legs" and then just tried to reverse it into an argument about Gears of War 4. Gears of War 1 was unproven, so when positive reviews came out and it became one of t he most popular multiplayer games of all time, people jumped in! With Gears of War 2 and 3, a lot of the sales came from the first few months because the fanbase was already established. Because of this, their legs were technically "worse". Like looking at Gears of War 2, it had 500k less sales it's second year than Gears of War 1, and 400k less on it's 3rd year. This was even more true for Gears 3, although it launched like 2 months before those games(just like Gears 4 which launched a month before 1 and couldn't match it's first year sales physically). Gears of War 4 already has an established fanbase, it should have sold massively it's first few months. It didn't. It's not going to magically get the best legs in Gears of War history simply because "Gears of War has good legs". Yeah, they do, but moree people should have bought it in it's first year. Because of this , even accounting for digital, there's allmost no way Gears of War 4 can get to 6 million. It's not going to have the legs of Gears of War 1, and considering it's install base was so small initially, it's not going to match 2 or 3 in sales. It has an established franchise, it's on a console that has a bigger install base than the Xbox 360 in the same time frame, and even with much bigger digital sales, it can't account for it's bad initial launch. 

"The sales are lower but Halo isnt as big as it used to be "

...yes...this is ... literally what I'm saying? I don't know how you clarifying that helps your point.

It's not exaggerating. Look man, I'm trying to be reasonable here but I've clarified this twice and I'm going to clarify it one last time. I know you like Xbox but like damn. 5 million sales in 3 months is great for a triple A game, it's great for almost any game, but it's not great for certain franchises, and it's certainly not great for Halo. Halo 3 sold 8.1 million units in 3 months on a smaller install base(from what I understand it's not significantly smaller, but still). Halo Reach and Halo 4 sold 5 million in a month. You resorted to using an overpriced side game that was lambasted by users and online reviewers when it originally came out to show Halo 5 "performing strong". You can call a donkey a turtle but it's still an ass. Halo 5's sales are better than a lot of games out there, but in an era where Splatoon 2 and Playerunknown's Battlegrounds are matching it or even outperforming, I'm not going to jump for joy at 5 million in 3 months. It's mediocre. Maybe "extremely mediocre" is an overstatement for other franchises, but for Halo? No. It was Microsoft's 3D Mario. And I know I already brought this up, but if a 3D Mario, or you know ... if an Uncharted game sold 2 million in 3 months would people be jumping for joy? No. It's mediocre for the series. 

" Rare replay includes a bunch of xbox 360 games that Rare made for xbox"

It was a joke, dear. 

"The game sales wise is lower than past Halos but it could end up beating Halo 1 and ODSt which is decent."

Decent is somethig I'd use for mediocre sales figures

"so i dont know how that doesnt speak "xbox brand"

Well because I was talking about what Microsoft was releasing as "heavy hitters" or "big games" on the Xbox One, and to try and diminish my argument you guys brought up an indie and compilation disk. Like it's totally fine if they sell well, but they're not exactly the core of Xbox. Ori is getting there though. Like I have no problem if you say "Hey, these xbox  games sold well!" but those weren't the kind of games I was addressing.

"Ori is on steam too so its not really just an xbox thing."

...and you continue to make my argument for me : P I think you might be getting a bit confused no offense

Street Fighter 5 only fail because it went Sony only, those Sony fans just wanted the game to be an exclusive they did not care to buy it, they just wanted to say they have one more exclsuive overy Xbox and Nintendo. In the end, Capcom just hurt themselves the most, no one taking the Street Fighter brand seriously after making it a sony only, and now everyone is getting their fighting fixes else where. As you can see every other fighting game selling more than Street Fighter, and I bet you Arms will pass Street Fighter also, if it do not its because Splatoon got release way too close to it, so its sales number will drop until people tire out from Splatoon and need something to change up. 

I knew this would happen to Street Fighter 5, but Capcom needed to learn a lesson, and all the sony fans who claim they wanted the game will try to put some type of blame on why they did not get it. It is street fighter, how do you not get it. The way I see how things work from my short time years ago selling games, sony fans want exclusives but the games they mostly buy is games that are multiplatform, most times because they want to talk about the game with their friend who own another system, if they both do not own a ps4, they are less likely to pick up street fighter 5. 

I hope Nintendo and Microsoft tell Capcom no on bringing their next street fighter to their system, let the brand die because of their stupidity to make it sony exclusive. Guilty Gear say they bringing some fighting games the Switch way, so Switch will be good no need for Capcom,.....if I am not mistaken Capcom vs Tatsunko for Wii which was one of my favorite probably sold as much as street fighter 5 or more

LoD 2 will come before it.

But that's exactly what i was saying. Again I don't see what we're arguing about, I'm just saying the sales aren't mindblowing. And to be fair, I went out of my way to include the most positive sales figures I could find for the game. Capcom's last statement is very outdated with the game having sold 1.7 million units as of early 2015. After that point no one was posting easy-to-search articles about the games success. I'm actually weakening my argument to be fair and unbiased...because my point was never that it's sales weren't great or weren't in some way impressive, just that I don't think that's an example where you can prop up an Xbox title and make a good point for Xbox exclusive success.

"Gears 3 legs werent as great as the other Gears game but i think its because a lot of sales came earler" Right..which is what I said. But I also made that case for Gears of War 2...are you going to ignore that just to make a point? Like I said, Gears of War "legs" get worse not because the sales get worse but because more people buy the game early in it's life cycle as the games become more trusted. Considering Gears of War 4 is already a sequel to a well established franchise, and considering it didn't have good foundational sales, it would be nearly impossible to catch up. 

"but i doubt it will be a huge drop for the series" 

Well see this is the problem I have, you care more about semantics and wording then sales numbers. Personally, if Gears 4 sold 6 million by the end of the Xbox's life all I could say is "jeez...it took that long?" Since most Gears games hit a HUGE majority of their target demographic in just a year or two. The fact that it's just now at around 4 million means it's taking a long time to hit that demographic, and that's assuming that it's hit 4 million(which btw, you used 25% as the digital attach rate converter but then said tha would prop it up from 3 mil to 4... that's 3,750,000 not 4 but that's just nit picking haha). But if the game doesn't sell 6 mill, then this argument would be whether "xxx numbers" is a "big drop off". Considering you think a sales decrease of 37.5% in a 3 month period isn't "mediocre", then I have a feeling you would shrug at 4.5 or 4 million lifetime sales like it's not a big drop off. But see, objectively it is. Whether or not you think mediocre is the proper word to use, a sales decrease of 1.5 or 2 million is a lot. And I think Gears will probably face that. My guess is that by the end of the Xbox One era it will be about 1.5-1.3 million behind Gears of War 1, not including whatever digital sales that game garnished. And that's a lot, whether you think that's a "big dip off" or not. Keep in mind, Gears of War 2 and 3 were very popular when digital sales were rising. 

"Halo 5 selling 5 million in 3 months is lower than other Halo games dont get me wrong. But if it hasnt by now it could outsell Halo ODST and Halo 1 which imo doesnt seem "extremely mediocre" for the series. Also not to mention that its one of the most active Halos and had made lots of money for MS and 343 so ira definitly a financial success."

But again....this is a semantic argument over a sales one. Look, you keep quoting the "extremely mediocre" thing, but let me ask. If I just took the "extremely" part out, would you agree? I don't see how a new Halo title, that's a mainline entry, in an era with huge digital sales, that features master chief, is anything above mediocrity if you are comparing it to a 60$ rip off side game. Like what even. A dip off of millions of copies is technically, objectively, huge. This isn't like GTA 6 having 7 million less sales than the 80 million copies sold GTA V. This is Halo, and selling a few million less is objectively big, whether or not you choose one word over the other.

Also, Halo 5 being one of the most "active Halos" is partially true and untrue. It has maintained a population much better than 4, but the way that Halo 5 calculates it's online population is misleading and a lot different than 3 and Reach. Halo 5 calculates Monthly Active Users, which means it counts unique users who log in, no matter how many times they do so, as a user who's played that month. All you have to do to be a MAU is to simply turn on your xbox, sign into Xbox live, and sit in the Halo 5 menu. You don't have to play consistently or play multiplayer or anything like that. Just start the game with the internet on! Considering Halo 5 has consistent updated content, and considering it went free for a limited time and was bundled, it's not really surprising that it has a lot of MAU, but it's such a misleading figure. Halo games used to have specific player counters for multiplayer, showing you how many people are playing what game mode, what playlist etc. 343 didn't add a Halo 5 player counter, because they knew it would cause problems. The figures are misleading and I would bet that Halo 3, Reach, and even 2 had more consistent concurrent player counts in their multiplayer modes than Halo 5 ever has. Oh but of course you can download this free update, check it out for an hour and now bam! You are a figure for a statistic. Even twitter's co founder criticized the statistic. In fact 343 got called out on it, and pretty much acted like they knew the whole time and weren't pulling a PR stunt

"Following 343’s statement, the Halo population statistics have become widely discussed on the TeamBeyond forums (check out the pages before and after that particular page as well).

According to several TeamBeyond forum users, Halo 5: Guardians doesn’t come anywhere close in terms of population to Halo 3. One user even stated that Halo Reach was far more popular than Halo 5.

The studio head was asked why 343 has been so anxious when it comes to Halo 5’s population numbers since they have been stating that those numbers have been quite amazing.  Holmes replied that those numbers could probobaly be gathered from the public Halo 5 API program which gives players tools to access game data. 343 however, decided not display those numbers in game due to players focusing on them too much.

Notice how they don't address Reach(wtf how do i get rid of  this font)

" Splatoon 2 outsold Halo 5 in japan but i doubt it will outperform it. Battlegrounds is a new hit game. Its already outsold the XB1 version of CO IW, and AW, and BF1. Also FIFA, madden etc."

Really? Well, I don't know, it really depends. But I think you're widely underestimating Splatoon 2's potential, it couldd be much bigger than Halo 5, or just hover above or below it. Honestly though, I think it will probably do 5-7 mil in it's first year. I don't really see how Battlegrounds being the new hit game makes it excusable for Halo to sell worse? Your point doesn't make sense because you're comparing one version of something. Battlefield and Call of Duty's community has and always will be split between 2(technically 3) platforms. That doesn't excuse Halo which used to be very competitive with the most popular xbox 360 COD's(I'm only using a single platform in this scenario because COD started selling like crazy at the end of the 360 era). Halo's market cap used to be above BF's and now it's below it. Most third party games get a much bigger bonus on PS4 than Xbox One, so your argument is misleading. It used to be the opposite the last gen, where they switched places based on title but were fairly biased.

"Oh by your first post you didnt specify that you meant heavy hitters or big games so i just mentioned games that were xbox eclusive."

Well I said "and people laugh when I say xbox games don't sell", so if you want to include those you can, but a remaster collection and an indie title ... idk just seems like a reach. But it is fair game : P 

The more the merrier