SmokedHostage said:
txrattlesnake said:
SmokedHostage said:
It's great to wake up in the morning and see one of these threads.
I'm personally tired of this.. "I THINK THIS GAME IS BAD, THEREFORE EVERYONE IN THE WORLD MUST THINK THIS GAME, AND IT WOULDN'T BE SELLING THE WAY IT IS IF IT WASN'T BUNDLED"
You know what, it must likely wouldn't be selling numbers to wait it has if it wasn't bundled but guess what? It is.. and nothing you can say can make it any less true.
Hell, why don't we put an asterik on EVERY bundle game and put an annotation saying This game was bundled and shouldn't count because it was bundled. I'm sure you'd piss off alot of people that way..
|
There are a lot of bundled games that shouldn't count. Combat didn't have much to do with the sales of the Atari 2600. It's always been debatable how much Tetris had to do with sales of the original Gameboy. There are only a handful of bundled games that would have sold as well unbundled including Super Mario Bros., Super Mario World, and Sonic the Hedgehog.
|
So your measure of quality is the determining factor in how much a game's sales should count if they're bundled..
No thanks.
|
I think my measure of quality here is how much these games would sell if they weren't bundled.
