By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - If Manhunt 2 sells well on the Wii

Chemical on 06 September 2007

All I can say is that I dont really need GTA on the wii, no more heroes is coming out on the wii and it is a gta-like game except we have beam katanas to play with. Beam Katanas>guns.



Proud owner of the following gaming devices:

PC, XBox 360, Wii, PS2, DS, PS3

 

Around the Network
BenKenobi88 on 06 September 2007

If you think No More Heroes is anything like GTA, you may need to pull out the PS2 again when it comes out...



LEFT4DEAD411.COM
Bet with disolitude: Left4Dead will have a higher Metacritic rating than Project Origin, 3 months after the second game's release.  (hasn't been 3 months but it looks like I won :-p )

a.l.e.x59 on 06 September 2007

Did the first Manhunt sell well on the Playstation 2?



Gamerace on 07 September 2007

I think Manhunt sales will reflect nothing other than if Wii owners want AO near content. Manhunt 1 didn't exactly reflect GTA sales...

You guys are missing two huges points. GTA is vastly popular with more casual gamers since you can just dick around for however much time you have to spend. Those people are buying Wiis and Rockstar is losing huge sales if they don't put GTA on Wii.

Second GTA still (is the only thing that) sells well on the PSP. The last couple games to the PS2 were PSP GTA ports. Hopefully they'll design for the Wii and degrade to the PSP not the other way around, but either way, PSP GTAs will also start appearing on the Wii. Count on it.



 

Fuzzmosis on 07 September 2007

It proves my grandmother is a sick sick woman?



See Ya George.

"He did not die - He passed Away"

At least following a comedians own jokes makes his death easier.

Around the Network
rasone77 on 07 September 2007
Fuzzmosis said:
It proves my grandmother is a sick sick woman?

No it proves that your grandmother isn't the only person playing the Wii.



Fuzzmosis on 07 September 2007

rasone77: Actually, judging by my family, it would not shock me if she was a sick sick woman. But I do not believe she has a Wii.



See Ya George.

"He did not die - He passed Away"

At least following a comedians own jokes makes his death easier.

Kasz216 on 07 September 2007
omgwtfbbq said:
Kasz216 said:
Not quoting because it's slowing up my computer. But you can prove these things statistically and they mostly have been proven. The only problem some people have is that other people are fine using correlations without causation that don't control for a number of other of factors to rig expierments to make it look a different way. The reason for this of course is that they get paid a lot to do so.

With a degree in something like psychology, sociology or any sort of expieremental science it's fairly easy to pick apart good studies from bad ones.

If violent games are like other "vice" products if anything they lower the things they are claimed to increase.

After all, that "virtual" person is the perverbial "kicked dog" for some people. The advantage in the game however is that this dog does not feel it as opposed to if your kid takes out his stress on a real pet.


That grey line at 1993 is the release of Doom, and the beginning of violent video games being released. This graph clearly shows that violent video games PREVENT violent crimes!

I hope we all know that Correlation != Causation. Statistics can be found to back up any viewpoint, so take all these "studies" with a grain of salt. 


Well that's just a horrible graph because it assumes everything else is controlled over a large base of time.  There are studies that do account for controls like that as best as they can. 

Also while correlation doesn't prove causation, if the correlation is negative and all other factors are controlled within reason, you can reasonably conclude that it isn't causing a postive upbeat in something.



z64dan on 07 September 2007
Kasz216 said:
omgwtfbbq said:
Kasz216 said:
Not quoting because it's slowing up my computer. But you can prove these things statistically and they mostly have been proven. The only problem some people have is that other people are fine using correlations without causation that don't control for a number of other of factors to rig expierments to make it look a different way. The reason for this of course is that they get paid a lot to do so.

With a degree in something like psychology, sociology or any sort of expieremental science it's fairly easy to pick apart good studies from bad ones.

If violent games are like other "vice" products if anything they lower the things they are claimed to increase.

After all, that "virtual" person is the perverbial "kicked dog" for some people. The advantage in the game however is that this dog does not feel it as opposed to if your kid takes out his stress on a real pet.


That grey line at 1993 is the release of Doom, and the beginning of violent video games being released. This graph clearly shows that violent video games PREVENT violent crimes!

I hope we all know that Correlation != Causation. Statistics can be found to back up any viewpoint, so take all these "studies" with a grain of salt. 


Well that's just a horrible graph because it assumes everything else is controlled over a large base of time.  There are studies that do account for controls like that as best as they can. 

Also while correlation doesn't prove causation, if the correlation is negative and all other factors are controlled within reason, you can reasonably conclude that it isn't causing a postive upbeat in something.


Also that 1993 date correlates to about 20 years after the Roe v Wade decision. Maybe future criminals were aborted?