By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
atma998 on 25 April 2009
Edit Thread
Zuzic said:
gergroy said:
Zuzic said:
 

 

 

dude, your post is full of all sorts of fail.  first of all, I'm really sick of people bringing up the metal gear series as an indicator of how user base affects sales.  MGS3 had almost no marketing push, where metal gear solid 2 and 4 were highly marketed and pushed.  MGS3 is also the worse reviewed game of the series, metacritic of 91, where MGS2 is 96 and MGS4 is 94.  So your idea of MGS3 being highly regarded as the best in the series is laughable. 

Another issue with that argument is MGS4 was bundled with hardware, which nobody ever seems to think about when making this comparison.  I also love how you give LTD numbers of the game sold, but refer to it selling that number on the install base at the time.  Have people not bought ps3's since the game came out and also picked up that game? 

GT3 was bundled with the ps2 worlwide for over a year.  What do you think that might have done to the sales numbers of that game? 

As far as userbase affecting sales, think of it this way.  When you release a movie, you release it on dvd and blu ray.  Now, not as many have people have blu ray players, so the sells of that movie won't be as high on the blu ray side as the dvd side.  Now, imagine if you didn't release that movie on dvd at all, only blu ray.  Would that movie sell as much as it could if it was released on both?  No, because not as many people have access to blu ray players.  The same concept applies to video games.  Yes, there will be one or two exceptions to every rule but the idea that install base has nothing to do with sales is moronic at best.

 

 

40% of a games LTD is sold within the first week. A factor which is still current today, only thing changing that is things like WII fit. (Bundles don't count of course). 95% are sold within the first 2 months. Review scores do not equal sales, and surveys and general acceptance is MGS3 was the best. Personally I like 4 better, but whatever. MGS3 was far better then 2, review scores change per game. If you release a game, and it scores 95, I am 100% sure if you release a game which is the same it'll score lower. But why? Even if it's better it'll score lower.... But why...? People get used to it. MGS2 was groundbreaking, then MGS3 comes along, it did everything better but didn't have the impact.

 

Majoras Mask is a clear example of it. It is better then OoT(Though both are beaten by link to a past) but majoras is seen to be less of an impact. But why? OoT was the first jump to 3d, majoras mask just seemed less because of that.

 

People say goldeneye 64 is the best FPS of all time. Yet if you give it to someone who never played it before and started playing FPS now, they would probably say it's bad. Is it bad? Yes and no. Things age, and get worse with age as other games do things better, and even games that do it better may not be seen to be better in conparison.

 

FF is a good ideal. FF7 and 10 sold around the same. They both released on a console with not a large install base. FF12 and 10 have the same metacritic review, yet 12 sold 3 million less, on a much larger install base.

 

Install base means nothing. 2 things are what gets sales. Advertising, and core genre audience. No advertising, piss poor sales, no matter the game. Core genre audience refers to the actual number of people who enjoy said genre in that console userbase, and normally stays the same number throughout, in fact in most cases decreases, not increases.(People adopting or dropping). If you have 40 million people who have the console, yet only say 5 million actually like the RPG genre, if you sell 1 million, people would see that as only 2.5% buying the game. Is that fair to say, or is it fair to say 20% of people who are into those games bought it. Both are wrong, however it's something to thing about. Not that only people in that core audience are going to buy that type of game, but majority, around 90% comes from them, others are from people who want to try something new.

 

 

 

Really? 40% of a game LTD is sold in the first week? Then GT5:P should have sell only 1,6M? KZ2 won't sell more than 1,78M, LBP should be at 837k and MGS4 won't pass 4,5M LTD. 95% are sold within the first 2 months? Really? Then Halo 3 should be at 5.86M and SFIV (PS3) won't sell more than 50k for the rest of its lifetime. I won't argue about quality because it's more a matter of taste however.

Install base means nothing? If this is the case why games like MK Wii, Mario Party 8 or Super Mario Galaxy are selling all better than their last iteration in the GC era? Sure there are exceptions, but generally userbase is THE main factor.

Once again your post was full of all sorts of fails.