By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
happydolphin on 02 May 2012
Edit Thread
noname2200 said:
happydolphin said:

I understand what you're saying. I'd be glad to concede this point after looking into it a little more. What I'd like to see first is how it's trending in Japan as compared to gen 7, and if its weakening is due to other more regional factors (lack of other support software, market penetration of the platform, etc.). If it is trending poorly in japan in gen 7, then that would be a fair conclusion, that Mario Kart in and of itself can't drive a platform. Would that be a fair way to go about it?

ADDED: Also, by the same fact, keep in mind. If Mario kart was able to break out of core sales into evergreen pastures, then I believe the same is possible for 3D Mario. It's what I would call untapped potential. I just wanted to slide it in there while we were on the topic of the MK trend. Let's not dwell on it.

Mario Kart's always been an evergreen with wide appeal, from the first game in the series. It never "broke out." What made you believe otherwise?

And I'm not even trying to make a point here. I'm just observing that you're discarding useful data, starting with the anamolous point rather than the norm, and proceeding to analyze from there. This strikes me as flawed. Is it any surprise that a flawed analysis will spit out a flawed conclusion?

I'm honestly not sure what data you're referring to. Historical sales data of MK since inception, as provided by VGChartz, or the chart Rol was pointing to. I don't remember discarding anything.

What I meant by breaking out was, above and beyond its certain intrinsic appeal to all audiences, it managed to break out of being visible by a minority (the core), and ultimately having the exposure needed to end up selling in the 30Millions (the mainstream).

I don't see the flaw in that really. From 8.8M (SNES) to 31.92M (Wii). That's what I was refering to.

PosGamePlatformYearGenrePublisherNorth AmericaEuropeJapanRest of WorldGlobal
1 Mario Kart Wii Wii 2008 Racing Nintendo 13.56 11.79 3.50 3.07 31.92
2 Mario Kart DS DS 2005 Racing Nintendo 8.97 6.95 4.08 1.84 21.85
3 Mario Kart 64 N64 1996 Racing Nintendo 5.55 1.94 2.23 0.15 9.87
4 Super Mario Kart SNES 1992 Racing Nintendo 3.54 1.24 3.81 0.18 8.76
5 Mario Kart: Double Dash!! GC 2003 Racing Nintendo 4.12 1.77 0.87 0.19 6.95
6 Mario Kart: Super Circuit GBA 2001 Racing Nintendo 2.62 1.64 0.99 0.23 5.47

And I really wasn't saying that to counter you, I was saying that more in line with you, but for some reason you saw that term I used as a retort.

We should put this point aside though, as I said it was an aside. It was just a misunderstanding.

 

noname2200 said: 
happydolphin said:

In that case, what was the initial metric, and what was the heart of the issue? As far as I knew, we were talking about sales strength to compare the frugality of one series over another. Where was I wrong?
happydolphin said:

Since the bottom line is the heart of the issue, imagine this.

No. You've lost track of what we're talking about. Or rather, you've stayed on your initial point when I've been trying to break it down to why you shouldn't try to draw a conclusion with that data. My past several posts have not been "you're wrong, and here's why!" They've been, and I quote:

"What I'm saying there's far less value in comparing NSMB to MK7 than there is in comparing NSMB to SM3DL. "

That's pretty much it. Everything else is simply explaining why that is the case. Again, if you want to have a discussion about what's the best course of action for individual games' bottom lines, you're welcome to start a thread. But 1) that's not what this thread is about, and 2) don't use the data point you've been fixated on to prove any point vis-a-vis MK7. If you want an explanation for why you shouldn't do "2)", that's what all the gibberish about broccoli and bikes was about.

I offered a simple scenario, it doesn't require much more than simple feedback tbh.

"Imagine you were head of video game console manufacturing company trying to ensure momentum and a bottom line, then if you were to choose between releasing a JRPG or a 2D Mario game at a crucial point in time to drive momentum, then choosing a JRPG you would be in trouble."

What I'm trying to say is that, when judging the frugality of a title, you go by sales. But for a reason that's unclear to me, you want to compare the series in terms of their attributes . But it's irrelevant, since what ultimately matters is the frugality itself.

If this were a case where a specific title performs better in specific circumstances, affected by the attributes of these titles (due to genre for example), then I would understand you position. But as it is, there has been none of that in the debate. The only factor considered thus far is "Ability to sell".

So ultimately, this is false in the context of our quest for answers, currently: "What I'm saying there's far less value in comparing NSMB to MK7 than there is in comparing NSMB to SM3DL. "

Even though in the end the conclusions brought from the sales study will ultimately tie back into the debate about 2D Mario vs 3D Mario in terms of potency, the tool used in that instance is genre-agnostic.