noname2200 on 01 December 2012
| Jay520 said: 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. |
Actually, you're completely reversing what I'm saying. Your assertion is that the game is not a flop because it's a new IP and those can go on to do great. I'm simply pointing out that low debuts -> great success is a path rarely trod, and that if that is the sole argument that can be raised then it will fail, because such events are the exception rather than the rule. While I'm not inclined to think PSABR is going to be one of those exceptions without aggressive bundling, I haven't called it a flop yet.
