Will Halo Reach outsell Halo 3.

[fastyxx]

ymeaga1n said:

fastyxx said:
The definition of "prequel' is literally, in Latin a sequel that occurs beforehand.

Reach is a sequel in the Bungie Halo series, while a prequel in story. leo and ymeage1n are being way too restrictive here.

A true prequel to Halo would mean exclusion of all the advancements of the games and weapons and engines and technology that has gone into the game in the last decade. You're arguing just to argue again.

And yes, ymeaga1n, there are a small percentage of Halo 3 buyers who play campaign only - even if you said 20 percent, that would be 2 million buyers.

But there are 30 million more people in the install base. You really think that that in that 30 million new buyers there aren't people to replace those two million who just bought into the hype? you don't think the hype around this game this time around won't persuade buyers? The literally millions who rented/bought used/played as guests/played at friends in H3 because they missed the launch or didn't yet have a box aren't going to buy the next round? Bogus.

I bought Gears of War on launch. Didn't buy Gears 2. It still sold more. How come? I didn't buy it! How is that possible?

w/e

I still have yet to hear an argument that says Reach will fail to live up to H3 sales standards.

LOL I'm arguing just to argue? You're the one that is busting out the 'latin' definition of prequel. Thank you very much sir, but 99.99% of the people know a prequel is an addition to the storyline which takes place chronologically before the original narrative. Gee...kinda like halo reach. 

You, my friend, are the first person I've ever seen to say, "it's a prequel in story, but a sequel in order released"...well DUH, that's why it's called a prequel cause it's coming out AFTER the original story.

Is the hobbit movie a sequel because it's using newer cgi technology than LOTR? 

The Hobbit movie doesn't match up very well.  I'd say Phantom Menace would be a better example.  The Hobbit was written before the Lord of the Rings, so it isn't a prequel at all in either definition.  The Lord of the Rings is a sequel to the Hobbit, and The Hobbit movie is clealry going to be shaped by the success of Jackson's LOTR movies in a way that much supports my view on Reach's approach and why it should in many ways be considered the game's sequel no matter when the story takes place.  The Hobbit - though the story takes place first - will be heavily influenced and dependent on the influence of the later stories.