Halo 4 sells more in 7 weeks than GT:5 sold in its first year

[Dallinor]

JayWood2010 said:

Dallinor said:

I'd imagine a combination of the two is probably the best for most titles. Simply having the game sell 90% of it's total in one week puts money in the bank, but leaves little sustained income. If the game is big enough though, as is the case here with both titles, that of course doesn't matter really as the inital return will cover everything.

Disregarding profits and business etc. It's far more fun watching games with great legs leg it over milestones.

Still don't see where people are getting that Halo doesn't have legs but the reason for front loaded preferred games for companies is because the majority of the sells money is coming from full retail price instead of bargain bin price.

Oh yeah, I gather that.  

Just in terms of legs vs frontloaded it would depend on the title. If a game covers it's costs with it's initial weeks sales that's fantastic and ideal. If it has legs then it's a bonus. Some games though are frontloaded and don't have sustained legs, they literally fall off the charts. That's not what a publisher wants, they want to keep people interested and sometimes advertise a game later on to spur up increased interest and encourage legs.

In this case, Halo sells more first week and has strong legs too so that's the better scenario in compariosn to how GT sells.