By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
theprof00 on 17 March 2009
Edit Thread
wfz said:

I understand what you're saying, I have the whole time, but I still stand by what I said. What's with the personal insults?

You knowingly exclude data (I do? I just simply said that the data that was posted said that 3rd parties on wii doesn't look too great as M&S is only at 7m. I did not exclude any data, because I did not post it in the first place. However, by having not listed any 3rd party 10m+ sellers he proved the guys point, which was that there are no 10m+ 3rd party games on the wii)

 

 It is obvious that there are other games besides 10m+ sellers, (less than 10m sellers) and then think you can make a rational conclusion based on third party sales?

Nope, I specifically said "based on that data" I had no intention of going through the list because there is no point to. I am not arguing that wii sells less 3rd party games, it might completely dwarf the HD console 3rd games in total. I am saying that chas did not show anything to the contrary of the OP except that there aren't "dozens of ps 10m+ sellers"

 

His post only covered 10m+ sellers, but that in no way should be taken as the ultimatum for third party sales, that's ridiculous.

?? I do not understand what this means. Ultimatum is a "take it or leave it" I do not understand how the word fits in, and it seems like it should be a central part of this sentence according to the syntax.ALso, who is "his"? if it is the OP, then I would argue that he said 3rd party. If you mean chas, then I would argue that he was cherry picking the OPs post.

That's not even the point he was trying to make, so you were twisting his post around to make your silly conclusion.

Twisting what around? I'm just saying that he wasn't saying anything. I'm not twisting anything because there is no need to.

He never said that the list should be indicative of overall third party sales, yet that's how you took it. You took his post and twisted it into a conclusion that fit your argument. Great going.

Because of the context of the OP, which said 3rd party games. Again, cherry picking


Someone told him that there were many more 10+ PS million sellers than Nintendo million sellers, so he made a list to prove them wrong.

3rd party

That's all he did. You took his post and twisted it around, pretending that he made it a "rational" conclusion to prove that third party games have better sales on HD consoles.

It was always about 3rd party

Speaking of which, why did your post turn to HD? His list consisted of games on the PS brand and the Nintendo brand. Not only did he NOT mention the 360, but NONE of the consoles he mentioned in that 10m+ list were HD consoles!

The OP said that if you added ps3 to 360 it would equal wii sales (I don't agree btw). Again, cherry picking

That makes your conclusion even more far fetched. Nice going.