By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Gnizmo said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:

Actually I addressed everything you said, as I pointed out why people sell their games, because of how its value has diminished, you just didn't like how it disproved your argument.

Ah but you see that makes some false assumptions, first you assume that the number of people playing games would not grow, since as we've seen the majority of the world's population does not game, even if the number of games each person bought was reduced, games with wider appeal and eternal replayability, would draw in much larger audiences, more than making up for sales, secondly you assume that people will play the same games every day, even games with high replayability do not get played everyday, so bringing in new games would only result in the older games being played more sporadically, people would still play them but just not as often, a few times a month or a year, like with books and movies, I have books that I have owned for many years, and maybe read once every couple of years over, but I still buy new ones, in addition game consoles tend to be updated, so older consoles tend to get played less, I play my old nes games every now and then.  Collectors are different than people who keep something around becuase they like it and know that they will use it again, I am not a movie collector, but I have a bucn of old movies that I like that I keep around becauser I know that there will probably come a day that I want to watch them again, because I loved them the first time and know i'll enjoy seeing them again.

It disproved what argument? The one where I asked for evidence of your assertions? That is an easy argument to disprove. Sadly you still have not backed up one of your claims with any evidence.

I didn't bother reading your long winded explanation because, quite frankly, you just make shit up as it suits your needs half the time. Skimming it I see you avoid my statements directly, so I am going to bottom line it. If a game is still being replayed it eat up a certain amount of gaming time. Once all that gaming time is filled no new games would be bought. It is as simple as that. Once it gets pushed out then it has no value as a game. Address this point directly rather than dancing around it, and I will consider giving you a new response.

Actually I did, maybe you need to go read it again, as I pointed out, if you are willing to sell the game for less than you purchased it, it means that its value for you has declined, that is an economic fact and evidence of my point.

lol, already addressed it, as I pointed out, games are merely played more sporadically as new games come in, in addition games with greater replayability have a larger audience, just look at the million seller s chart and you'll see that games that have longer replayabilityare the really big sellers.

Also people say that Wii is only bought for Wii sports and Wii Fit, and a few other nintendo games, indicating that for their gaming time that's all they need, yet Nintendo contineus to sell more software weekly and makes more profit, so the idea that games with high replayability will cause a crash is silly, if it was Nitnendo would be hurting, not dominating



 

Predictions:Sales of Wii Fit will surpass the combined sales of the Grand Theft Auto franchiseLifetime sales of Wii will surpass the combined sales of the entire Playstation family of consoles by 12/31/2015 Wii hardware sales will surpass the total hardware sales of the PS2 by 12/31/2010 Wii will have 50% marketshare or more by the end of 2008 (I was wrong!!  It was a little over 48% only)Wii will surpass 45 Million in lifetime sales by the end of 2008 (I was wrong!!  Nintendo Financials showed it fell slightly short of 45 million shipped by end of 2008)Wii will surpass 80 Million in lifetime sales by the end of 2009 (I was wrong!! Wii didn't even get to 70 Million)