By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
the_dengle on 09 September 2013
Edit Thread
oniyide said:
the_dengle said:
oniyide said:


i bet they was, considering they were selling it for 60 bucks initially...which it had no business being that high in the first place. Soon as price dropped more people bought

Then here's a question: if it outsold its predecessor, if Ubisoft is profiting heavily from its sales at that price, and they are pleased with its sales in general -- in what way is the game considered a flop? Just why? Because it didn't sell GTA numbers?

how do you know its profitting? If it is then its not really a flop, BUT that doesnt mean those are good numbers for all the hype and good reviews it got. YOu dont know if it had a higher budget than Origins or not, but im gonna go out on a limb and say yes.

You're the one who said Ubisoft was happy with Origin's sales because they were selling it for 60 bucks. Legends sold more, and is also priced at $60. So the only reason you've given to call it a flop is because you're "going out on a limb" and saying that it had not only a higher budget, but a budget significantly higher enough to merit calling Legends a flop even though it outsold its predecessor.

Forgive me if I don't take your word for it? Since this game was originally going to be a launch window exclusive, just what kind of sales do you think Ubisoft was expecting to begin with?

And reviews have nothing to do with sales. If they did, I could call an indie or niche game with great reviews a flop for selling 5k FW.