By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RVDondaPC on 19 January 2010
Edit Thread
WilliamWatts said:
CGI-Quality said:

I wasn't aware that my post was being "mr smartie pants" in any way. But that outlook IS purely subujective, not necessarily a bad thing. Otherwise, the rest of the post was well put, even if there are parts where we would clash.

Im not talking a subjective 'deserved' but in terms of an objective metric. Does a game do X Y and Z to increase its appeal and broaden its audience. X could be features, Y could be advertising and Z could be potential audience size. Its easy to say that any game which dominates its sub niche 'deserves' to sell 5M copies but from an objective standpoint if it lacks the ability to bring in people who aren't keen on the genre it won't make it by this mark.

Halo 3 got a wide / excellent feature set, it had excellent advertising and shooters are a large audience so therefore it sold extremely well because it was a great game and because it hit all the marks.

Uncharted 2 has a narrower feature set with no coop, had excellent but more limited advertising and the sub genre it was in was not as large and it didn't manage to bring in as many people from outside the genre inspite of being a great game also.

I completely agree. However CGI is right in that it is subjective but the way you have broken it down makes sense and very hard to argue with. I do agree that games like Uncharted have lacked certain things that would make it more commercial friendly but to say it doesn't deserve to sell 5 million is completely subjective. The game may infect reach 5 million, but it definitely could have done more to reach a higher sales status but instead Naughty Dog/Sony decided not to do them while Bungie/MS has done them.