Metallicube said:
If you HD fans are REALLY truly going to cling on to your "it's an old port!!1" excuse for NMH failing on the HD consoles, why then did RE4 on Wii, a 2 year old port, perform so well compared to the PS2 and Cube versions?
Why did COD: Reflex, the inferior port of COD4 that came out 2 years later and had no advertising, manage to scrape 1 million sales? Ports mean little. If the game is good enough, people will wait to buy it.
Being a port shouldn't matter, because all those HD gamers out there who were just starved for another Suda 51 game could finally buy one on their beloved HD consoles, albeit 2 years later. But if they wanted the game enough, do you really think they would simply stop wanting the game and give up on buying it? If that is indeed the case, then they must not have wanted it that much in the first place.
If we all should have expected this game to do poorly since it was a port, why then did Ubisoft bother releasing this port for the HD consoles in the first place (especially when you consider the costs for developing on HD consoles compared to Wii)? Why then did so many HD fans claim before the port was released that "NOT we will finally see the game actually get some sales!"
I just love topics like this because it shows clearly how fanboyism is so pronounced that it gets in the way of LOGIC. Despite the Wii version performing BETTER than the individial HD versions, the HD versions are still somehow a success "well CONSIDERING... blah blah blah" while the Wii is still at fault for making poor Suda 51's game fail. Honestly people, take a step back and think about what you're trying to argue from the viewpoint of logic.
If you're going to claim the game to be a success, that's fine, but you must also include the Wii version because the sales #s are so similar. Similarly, if the game bombed on Wii, it also bombed on the HD versions. You guys are trying to have your cake and eat it too.
|
