richardhutnik said:
The debate gets framed in the context of moving consoles and selling. Too often games on the PS3 are positioned as "game changers" by some, and the game has to be held up to high standards as far as sales go. Killzone 2, rather than just be a good FPS, was positioned by Sony themselves in a executive press release, as a game that would win 360 owners over (or at least get them to look at the PS3). And then I saw Resistance 2 get fragged by the Sony fan side, because it didn't match Gears 2 in sales. End result, one can't just talk up a game as being great, it has to win over people to consoles. I guess it is the nature of a website like this, that is centered around sales. |
1) You didn't answer my question.
2) When compared to the sales of it's prequal, Resistance 2 did quite well. I also noticed quite few people on this site were getting more excited over KZ2 than R2 before both games released. After R2 released quite a few people spoke displeasure with the game. I noticed most of these people actually PLAYED THE GAME and alot of them saying that the original was just better. So what makes you say people were putting it down for sales? I'm sure some were but not the majority.
3) SONY wanted KZ2 to attract the 360 audience??? NO SHIT. KZ1 was to attract the HALO crowd, no suprise that the sequal would be another attempt. Doesn't SONY want more customers? Wouldn't they be happy if they could lower the other systems attatch ratio by getting fans of the other system to warm up to the PS3?
4) This site is centered around sales, yes. But not every thread is about sales. That's why there's a sales discussion...
If I make a thread in the SONY forums that's mainly about features in Game A while not mentioning anything about another game, you think I want posters posting about Game B and how my game A will never amount to it's sales so there's no reason why I should be posting about it?
4 ≈ One







