Quantcast
Dead Space Extraction is a MAJOR flop - we need to talk about it

Forums - Sales Discussion - Dead Space Extraction is a MAJOR flop - we need to talk about it

ClaudeLv250 said:
Delicious irony. I remember hen this game was announcd the HD cowd screamed that the Wii would ruin Dead Space. When it was announced to be a rail shooter, their indignation changed to laughter as the made fun of the Wii getting another toss away spinoff.

Now that the game is here, this mockery has turned into Sony tools screaming at the top of their lungs against the Wii based on a game people clearly didn't care about in the first place while doing the same old moronic song and dance while clinging to games like Zack & Wiki nearly three years after the fact.

For you people to be so obsessed with sales and metacritic for Wii games, it's strange that you don't go the extra effort to own a Wii and buys these games you cry about so loudly on the internet.

Yeah youre right, its only ever us PS3 guys.

Nobody denounced graphics and FPSs until Conduit, which was then held up as the holy grail to the Wii, not forgetting the countless front page articles and glowing review here on VGC. Arent most of VGC Gods mostly Nintendo fans?

And my favourite, MH3, yeah 1.5 million in sales? That was all dreamt up by PS3 fanboys, dont listen to them, listen to yourself and lower your expectation the minute a Wii game flops.



Around the Network
ClaudeLv250 said:
Delicious irony. I remember hen this game was announcd the HD cowd screamed that the Wii would ruin Dead Space. When it was announced to be a rail shooter, their indignation changed to laughter as the made fun of the Wii getting another toss away spinoff.

Now that the game is here, this mockery has turned into Sony tools screaming at the top of their lungs against the Wii based on a game people clearly didn't care about in the first place while doing the same old moronic song and dance while clinging to games like Zack & Wiki nearly three years after the fact.

For you people to be so obsessed with sales and metacritic for Wii games, it's strange that you don't go the extra effort to own a Wii and buys these games you cry about so loudly on the internet.

Get off of your high horse. It's not just Sony fans that pull that shit.



Egghead said:
ClaudeLv250 said:
Delicious irony. I remember hen this game was announcd the HD cowd screamed that the Wii would ruin Dead Space. When it was announced to be a rail shooter, their indignation changed to laughter as the made fun of the Wii getting another toss away spinoff.

Now that the game is here, this mockery has turned into Sony tools screaming at the top of their lungs against the Wii based on a game people clearly didn't care about in the first place while doing the same old moronic song and dance while clinging to games like Zack & Wiki nearly three years after the fact.

For you people to be so obsessed with sales and metacritic for Wii games, it's strange that you don't go the extra effort to own a Wii and buys these games you cry about so loudly on the internet.

Yeah youre right, its only ever us PS3 guys.

Nobody denounced graphics and FPSs until Conduit, which was then held up as the holy grail to the Wii, not forgetting the countless front page articles and glowing review here on VGC. Arent most of VGC Gods mostly Nintendo fans?

And my favourite, MH3, yeah 1.5 million in sales? That was all dreamt up by PS3 fanboys, dont listen to them, listen to yourself and lower your expectation the minute a Wii game flops.

Yes, it is only you Sony guys. You're the only ones that care. You do it over and over and over and over again.  I can count the Microsoft fanboys that do it on one hand, and I know them well enough to know why they do it.

You must have gotten The Conduit confused with Killzone 2.

And yes, 1.5 million was pulled out of fanboy asses. That was a big deal when it happened. First Sony fans claimed MH3 wouldn't sell as a sort of revenge for it going to Wii, then the game shipped 1 million copies and they started quaking in their boots. So this bullshit about it not seling 1.5 comes out of no where when all Capcom ever said was 2 million WW by the end of the fiscal year. With another nefarious plan deflated, they basically did what they always do: MH3 was promptly ignored and they began to cling to Zack & Wiki again for their rage arguments against dvelopers having the audacity to support the Wii.

 



Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"

What's to talk about? EA made a game that nobody wanted to buy. It's really just that simple.

Is it because it had no advertising? No, lots of games do better than this with similarly small advertising. Muramasa creamed this game in sales with only internet advertising.

Is it because it's mature? No, there are lots of mature games which sold better than this. In fact, almost all mature games on the Wii sold better than this.

Is it because it's HARDCORE? WTF does that even mean? If you mean mature, I just pointed out that this is a dismal failure relative to other mature titles on the Wii, and it certainly isn't a difficult game only designed to appeal to seasoned players or retro gamers.

Is it because it's a rail shooter? Well, now we're actually getting somewhere. The Wii has piles of rail shooters out, and more on the way. EA was beaten to the punch by almost everybody on the idea of putting a mature rail shooter on the Wii. At this point, all the other rail shooter games out are cheaper to buy.

Is it the IP? Well, it made a tiny splash on the HD consoles, but moving that IP to a new platform and a new genre isn't a formula for reeling in the fans... at all. Those upcoming rail shooters I mentioned above have a better pedigree than Dead Space, one being developed by Treasure and published by Nintendo and the other being the sequel to the Resident Evil game that started this on-rails avalanche of Wii games.

Is it because Wii gamers are mouth-breathing morons who don't understand what a great, quality game this is *points to metacritic score*? No, unlike reviewers who are given games for free, Wii gamers actually have to pay money to play games. If you can't persuade somebody to part with their money, it's because your game isn't good enough to deserve that much money. Maybe this game will do better at a $30 price tag.

In conclusion, EA screwed up, and almost nobody wanted this game. They're either buying the cheap rail shooters already out, or they wanted a 3rd person Dead Space, or they're sick to death of the genre, or they're waiting for rail shooters from Nintendo or Capcom that they think will be better, or there are other games they'd rather spend $50 on right now, or all of the above. This game had every reason to fail, and almost no reasons to succeed.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

Whats teh next hardcore game coming out?



Black Women Are The Most Beautiful Women On The Planet.

"In video game terms, RPGs are games that involve a form of separate battles taking place with a specialized battle system and the use of a system that increases your power through a form of points.

Sure, what you say is the definition, but the connotation of RPGs is what they are in video games." - dtewi

Around the Network
BMaker11 said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
Why did you put "we need to talk about it" in your thread title? There's a million other threads about it, and we're all pretty much in agreement that nobody cares about this game, its lack of marketing (it's just a test), its lack of effort (it's just a test), its lack of sales, its lack of quality, or its lack of fans. Nobody cares and nobody likes it. We really don't need to talk about it. Anymore.

Nobody cared?

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=87763

Explain, please.

Lack of quality and effort?

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/deadspaceextraction

Explain, please

Explanation 1: A couple people care.  Not enough for anybody else to care.  Let those 5 or so people enjoy their game.  But it costs too much.

Explanation 2: Metacritic is STUPID, and a horrible way to judge quality.  It is an aggregate of reviews from a very narrow population of gamers.  Nobody who writes at Metacritic is a friend of mine whose tastes I trust, so I really don't care what they have to say about any games that I like or dislike, and the only time I ever hear of the web site is when people on the internet use it to troll the Wii.

Or do you honestly believe the 3 greatest games of all time are Ocarina of Time (1998), Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (2000), and Soul Calibur (1999)?  If you agree with that 100%, by all means, use Metacritic in all your arguments.  Your tastes and Metacritic's scores are perfectly in alignment.  For me, none of those games would make my top 20, so the use of Metacritic in arguments is completely absurd.

And by "lack of effort" I mean "on-rails" and "calling it a test."  They really didn't care about the game, gave it no marketing, and sent it out to die.



The Ghost of RubangB said:
BMaker11 said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
Why did you put "we need to talk about it" in your thread title? There's a million other threads about it, and we're all pretty much in agreement that nobody cares about this game, its lack of marketing (it's just a test), its lack of effort (it's just a test), its lack of sales, its lack of quality, or its lack of fans. Nobody cares and nobody likes it. We really don't need to talk about it. Anymore.

Nobody cared?

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=87763

Explain, please.

Lack of quality and effort?

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/deadspaceextraction

Explain, please

Explanation 1: A couple people care.  Not enough for anybody else to care.  Let those 5 or so people enjoy their game.  But it costs too much.

Explanation 2: Metacritic is STUPID, and a horrible way to judge quality.  It is an aggregate of reviews from a very narrow population of gamers.  Nobody who writes at Metacritic is a friend of mine whose tastes I trust, so I really don't care what they have to say about any games that I like or dislike, and the only time I ever hear of the web site is when people on the internet use it to troll the Wii.

Or do you honestly believe the 3 greatest games of all time are Ocarina of Time (1998), Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (2000), and Soul Calibur (1999)?  If you agree with that 100%, by all means, use Metacritic in all your arguments.  Your tastes and Metacritic's scores are perfectly in alignment.  For me, none of those games would make my top 20, so the use of Metacritic in arguments is completely absurd.

And by "lack of effort" I mean "on-rails" and "calling it a test."  They really didn't care about the game, gave it no marketing, and sent it out to die.

No, no. YOU think it's a stupid way to judge quality.

You just don't understand how to interpret the numbers. That's all.



silicon said:
Soriku said:
Steroid said:
Let us speak plainly.

Money talks. And when Carnival Games outsells Punchout, The Counduit, House of the dead Overkill, Dead Space: Extraction, No more Heroes, Tales of Symphonia, Okami and Fire Emblem COMBINED what sort of a message do you think that sends to third party developers?

Too bad there's no data on World of Goo though (Wii's only AAA rated third party exclusive).


And despite that, many core games are still on the Wii and many core games are coming to the Wii. I wonder how that must work out for you :(


Yeaaaaaaaaaah....I don't think companies are so close minded that one exception puts them down like you'd like (hope) to believe.

 

What is that based on and what does that mean?


That, despite the thought of Carnival Games selling better than those games he listed, companies are still putting quality core games on the Wii.

When a big game flops on the Wii, call us. Otherwise this is a horrible example proving why third party core games sell on the Wii.

famousringo made a good point with Muramasa crushing this game in sales. Why? Because people actually cared for it. This game...not so much. I'm sure if it was a TPS like Dead Space 1 the response would've been different. BUt calling it a "test," a "guided first person experience," and so on? Yeaaaaaaah....that won't work out for you.




Barozi said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
BMaker11 said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:
Why did you put "we need to talk about it" in your thread title? There's a million other threads about it, and we're all pretty much in agreement that nobody cares about this game, its lack of marketing (it's just a test), its lack of effort (it's just a test), its lack of sales, its lack of quality, or its lack of fans. Nobody cares and nobody likes it. We really don't need to talk about it. Anymore.

Nobody cared?

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=87763

Explain, please.

Lack of quality and effort?

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/deadspaceextraction

Explain, please

Explanation 1: A couple people care.  Not enough for anybody else to care.  Let those 5 or so people enjoy their game.  But it costs too much.

Explanation 2: Metacritic is STUPID, and a horrible way to judge quality.  It is an aggregate of reviews from a very narrow population of gamers.  Nobody who writes at Metacritic is a friend of mine whose tastes I trust, so I really don't care what they have to say about any games that I like or dislike, and the only time I ever hear of the web site is when people on the internet use it to troll the Wii.

Or do you honestly believe the 3 greatest games of all time are Ocarina of Time (1998), Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (2000), and Soul Calibur (1999)?  If you agree with that 100%, by all means, use Metacritic in all your arguments.  Your tastes and Metacritic's scores are perfectly in alignment.  For me, none of those games would make my top 20, so the use of Metacritic in arguments is completely absurd.

And by "lack of effort" I mean "on-rails" and "calling it a test."  They really didn't care about the game, gave it no marketing, and sent it out to die.

No, no. YOU think it's a stupid way to judge quality.

You just don't understand how to interpret the numbers. That's all.

With my limited understanding, big numbers is good and small numbers is bad.  That's as far as my logic goes.

Please enlighten me, and explain how to interpret the numbers other than that, so I can understand why Metacritic is actually a reliable way to judge how much fun I'm having when I play my favorite games.



I'm not gonna target this at anyone specific but the general populace: Anyone who takes reviews for word on what they want to buy is an idiot, plain and simple. Better to formulate your own opinions, or see what most people say at least not just reviews. Reviews just give an idea what a game is like.