| Aielyn said:
I didn't spend a paragraph justifying a number, I provided an example number for the purposes of discussion, and justified my choice of example number. And I didn't say you were ignoring the actual numbers, I said you were ignoring actual numbers - as in, the ISSUE of actual numbers. I also never claimed that console launches produce larger impacts than "a slew of new releases". What I said was that you can't do the comparison you did because it's a different circumstance. It's like you extract individual sentences from my posts, and ignore the context of them. When I am talking about 3D World debuting where it did because of the console launches, I'm not saying "console launches have a bigger impact", I'm saying "this is the reason for it in this particular situation". And, from the context of THE ENTIRE DAMN ARGUMENT, it's specifically about how you can't call 3D World a flop based solely on "it debuted at number 14". If you want another demonstration of this point, consider that Just Dance, on launch in the US, sold less than 6.5k copies (not even in the top 75). In Europe, it didn't quite make 15k (74th on the chart for the week). The game ended up selling 7 million copies. Position on the charts isn't what defines success. Neither is first week sales, although it's a little more notable than chart position. The assertion that began this argument was that 3D World was a flop - a statement that had zero justification, and the whole reason I brought up the other Mario titles was to emphasise my point about launch numbers, and the fact that games that sell 10+ million, even, can have smaller launches. But hey, why bother trying to understand context? What matters is that you made a strong point about... uhhh... what was it again? That 3D World didn't have a massive launch? I'm not exactly clear - you seemed to jump into the argument without any actual point, except perhaps to try to demolish my argument without any attention to context. |
If you are using the number in comparison to actual numbers, then I would say it goes beyond just an example number.
You didn't say that word for word, but what exactly was
"None of those games were up against a console launch, let alone two of them. As you say, 3D Land had AC:R, SR3, Halo HD, and Zelda SS all launching the same week... 3D World has every PS4 launch title launching the same week."
supposed to mean? Certainly seems to be minimizing the conditions for the other releases.
I'm sure you'll take umbrage with me quoting you again, but this is the reason I initially made that first post.
"The point I'm making here is, it debuted at 14 because it was released at the same time as a new console launch, and a week after another new console launch.
Note that Super Mario 3D Land debuted at 9th in the UK. It has now sold 8.7 million copies worldwide and 560,000 copies in the UK."
You were making justifications for the placement this week while using the somewhat low placement of 3D Land as evidence that it could have a large LTD. You keep going on and on about context, yet you took such issue with my first post which was giving context to the positions of the previous three 3D Mario games. Then, when you put out your hypothetical number for 3D World I put it in context of the previous week that contained a console launch, and the week of 3D Land.
Instead of addressing any of that you spent around half your post complaining that I had lost track of the argument. Let's look back at it shall we? Pavolink made a post, you quoted less than a third of it, and then only addressed about half of that third. That was Pavolink's solitary post in this thread. I really jumped into the middle of a heated debate there. Not that I think he had some doctoral thesis hidden within his post, but it seems you did the same thing you are accusing me of. At the very least you admit I addressed individual sentences. Poor Pavolink seems to have only had the "14" and "flop" portion of his post addressed.
It's almost eerie how similar this whole thing has been to your arguments last year. (well excluding most of that stuff above, focusing more on the content of your argument) Except now you are using Just Dance instead of Need For Speed Carbon. Sure, if 3D World beats its first week every week for a year and a half then it would be a huge success in the UK. Now what are the chances of this actually happening? At least 3D World having a decent LTD is a much more likely prediction than Just Dance 4 hitting 100k in the UK in 2012 after a 1.7k first week.
