By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
oniyide on 01 July 2013
Edit Thread
J_Allard said:
Mr Puggsly said:
CGI-Quality said:

The list doesn't even have any of the PS3's most notable franchises, rendering it meaningless. Singstar games available in one territory, Japanese-only games, and compilations aren't the bulk of Sony's 7th gen strengths at all. They merely add to the quantity.

In regards to MAG, it didn't fail, no, but it's hardly worth pointing out when discussing sales.

Still can't get over it can you?

Someone said MAG sold poorly because it was online only. So I pointed out it sold better than most of Sony's PS3's releases. Even if you remove Japan only releases or comipilations, MAG is still closer to the top of the list than the bottom. You know its true.

Hence, that was an example of Sony's online only shooter being a more worthwhile endeavor than most games Sony has released on PS3. People are concerned how an online only game can perform. Well offline games flop quite often.

You're being defensive for no reason and you're completely missing the point.

Yeah seems strange that he saw the list and immediately assumed it was some sort of attack on Sony, or a testimony to the strength of their games or something. Someone made a comment about MAG's sales and you expanded on it in a factual, unbiased manner.

oniyide said:

those amazing SP campaigns are one of the reasons its as popular as it is now, maybe not the main reason. You think COD would have been as popular had it ALWAYS been a MP affair? I somehow doubt that, NOW? sure they could take away SP and still do alright but its already been established.

But it always had amazing campaigns and never put up anywhere near those numbers. I think MP is the biggest reason it puts up those numbers. SP and offline MP are two other big reasons. Again, no one said "as popular". Of course it's not going to put up 20+ million, or even 10+ million. But it can move a lot of units.

The word of mouth about how this is the next game from "the CoD guys" and the marketing machine MS will throw behind it, are going to ensure some massive sales. Not to mention the game just looks fantastic. Also, lets not forget that Call of Duty started out as a next gen console exclusive for MS on the 360, just like Titanfall will for Xbox One. And CoD3 was a great MP game, but did not do amazing numbers. It took a really phenomenal game hitting a market desperate for a killer FPS game and hitting it at just the right time for CoD to catch lightning in a bottle. It might not be realistic to expect any FPS franchise to ever put up "CoD numbers" ever again. But at the same time, Titanfall has the best chance of doing so. It doesn't have to dominate right from the start. CoD2 certainly didn't.

I dont think amazing is a word i would use to describe their campaigns prior to COD4, really name a couple of oh crap moments from any of those prior games. I would argue that COD4's campaign was the reason word of mouth spread so much about that game in the first place. Soap, the nuke attack on the Marines, the compelling villians, being taken out of WW2 setting. People were and still talk about that campaign. Yes they stayed for the multiplayer. But the multiplayer of COD today isnt even the same as it was when it first came out. I dont work for Fringe division so i have no idea how well a COD game with just multiplayer from the get go woudl have done, but we can agree it wouldnt  have done anywhere near the numbers they put up now, especially if they were going to be charging full retail price and start out on consoles that were still iffy on the online thing.