noname2200 said:
That's fair. My apologies for becoming impatient. I don't agree with either of those conclusions, because each is based on irrelevant data points. The chart is relevant to show that a recently released 3D Mario platformer is only doing marginally better in 2012 than a 2D Mario platformer from 2006. This is, if not an apple-to-apple comparison, then at least an apple-to-pear comparison (or whatever fruit is the apple's close relative. I'm not a botanist). You're asking what it means about the healthiness of a game in a completely different genre. This is an apple-to-broccoli (sic) comparison; the two in completely different genres, with nothing in common beyond a theme. It's an especially flawed comparison when Mario Kart 7 already has a DS counterpart that launched somewhat around the same time as NSMB. Basically, the reason I didn't answer your question is because, based on the data presented, I could draw no real conclusion. For a VERY imperfect, off the cuff analogy, think of someone saying that "the top 100m sprinter in the 2000 Olympics had a best time of 10 seconds. The top 100m sprinter in the tryouts for the 2012 Olympics had a top time of 12 seconds. From this, what can we conclude about the state of the Hammer Throw event at the 2012 Olympics?" |
But that's not a fair and consistent PoV. Rol has said time and time again that 3D Mario and 2D Mario are separate series. So how is that apples to apples, and not MK to 2D Mario?
This just seems like you're putting the argument on your side to win and it's not about that, it's about being intellectually honest and making progress in the debate. I hope it won't end up like this for other topics. That would suck alot, because you and Rol are very smart guys. I'd hate to not be able to pick your brains just because you want to keep the argument on your end. I can concede points, I am able to do that, ask Rol.
