spurgeonryan said:
I agree. See Dreamcast and N64 for example.
But sales do determine how many great games a great console will have. The Wii got way more than it would have gotten just because 100's ( 1,000's?) of devs wanted to get games on the system to play the "Lottery" and hopefully have one of the 100 million owners buy their games. Luckily, some of those games were good and it got a nice library of decent games in the end. People will still be digging through all the hidden treasures for years to come. So many games that were lost in the mix of all the shovelware. Although, Nintendo did put some effort into the GC. Just was still too little too late. The N64 years had Nintendo making too many bad choices, and I think that hurt the GC some as well. People were mad that they did not get some third parties, third parties were mad at them, and the lack of games at times was not good. I was going to buy a GC either way, but some may have had a bad taste in their mouths. Which they did, so they bought a PS2. The rest is history. As is Mario Sunshine. It loses because of all of this. If it would have been on the Wii, it would have been different. History is written by the winners. Mario Galaxy is that winner. Huge review scores and huge sales. Only reason NSMB sold 3 times better is because of the Casual rush. |
I dont know why sales and reviews make Mario Galaxy a better game than Sunshine. Reviews are never objective, and Sunshine had a higher attach rate than Galaxy did.
