By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
noname2200 said:
Jay520 said:


same could be said in the reverse. For successful new IPs, large openings are the exception, not the rule. It's more times than not a low opening (100-200k). One week of sales is really a poor indicator of long term sales for new IPs. (Speaking on PABR here. Lbpk is most likely a flop).

Hope springs eternal, I suppose. I'll close this discussion by pointing out that 1) you're constructing a narrative out of a fawlsity, and more importantly 2) the vast majority of new IPs have low openings...and poor lifetime sales.



Perhaps most successful new IPs did not have low openings (I don't feel like looking it up right now). But do you disagree that this has been the case for a large number of them? Specifically new IPs on the PS3 too.

As for your second point...you're warranting calling it a flop because of what the majority of past games have done. If that were valid, that warrant you to call it a flop even before its released. Since the vast majority of new IPs have low sales, and PABR is a new IP, therefore it will flop. But of course that doesn't make sense.

The same goes for what you're doing now, except to a lesser extreme. You're saying the vast majority of new IPs with low openings have poor lifetime sales, and PABR is a new IP with a low opening, therefore it will have poor lifetime sales, therefore it will flop. This is nearly as bad as the aforementioned example.

Even if the vast majority of new IPs with low openings have poor lifetime sales, that doesn't mean its accurate to call a game a flop already. Think about this: If we called every new IP with a low opening a flop, we would have been wrong about a large portion of games. That portion would so large, that it I think it should sway the mentality on deciding when we can safely label a game as flopping.