By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Gamma626 on 17 December 2013
Edit Thread
fatslob-:O said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:

Yes, please, add more  filler to the conversation because we are well aware at this point that you have nothing intelligent to contribute. Unless things work differently in the the UK "Not every single person has the ability to make purchases" . To assume that is to make an ass out of your self, which you have clearly done agian. Oh and now due to your inability to intelligently debate you basically copy and paste my comments directed at you "properly reading and straw man".  So for the thousandth time, THOROUGHLY READ MY RESPONSE. I gave you a clear explanation as to the difference in sales between the two games. You need to go back to highschool if you cannot understand why 160 million consoles combined would have substantially larger sales for a game released several months ago than SMW3D which was released 3 weeks ago. Do you need further explanation?

Again with the excuses. We all know that 3D mario has smaller legs in comparison to other mario franchises. The point of of the game is supposed to make you buy the console. It's strange that you keep denying this notion. 

Nirvana_Nut85 said:

"Shakes head" you clearly do no read responses and go off in a nonsensical rant without actually addressing the comment properly. All of those games were reviewed with high scores? Correct. Therefore as I said earlier high scores contribute to sales, which is correct. If you underestimate the average consumers ability to incorporate reviews into their buying decision of a game (Wii was the exception) then your even less intelligent that I thought. Marketing is a big factor as well as previously stated. 

You still don't explain why there is a massive difference in sales despite the fact that there is very little difference in between scores. To say that your correct would simply be a stretch because you still don't give any reasons to my obvious question. You still probably won't be able to explain why the new medal of honor had higher sales than alot of the higher rated games like bayonetta as well as for the rest. Why is the WII an exception when it clearly had the most titles that sold over 5+ million ? It can't be just some coincidence that it happened because otherwise it would make your "you underestimate the average consumers ability to incoporate reviews" point null for the most part. Your the one that's less intelligent if you can't give me a clear relationship between review scores and sales. It's clear that the data you've shown to me only proves my point further as to why review scores don't correlate with sales.

Nirvana_Nut85 said:

I clearly did explain the differences. Your inability to process information when it's  provided to you is not my fault. Your pathetic attempts at continuing this conversation with nonesense and attempting to put words in my mouth by not looking at every fact I stated (reviews "contribute" , marketing significantly "contributes") once again proves you have absolutley no clue what you are talking about. You've been defeated but by all means keep the comments coming, it's rather amusing.

Then how about games like medal of honor where review scores don't contribute to it's sales. Or how about nintendo dogs being able to move 22 millions copies with an average metascore ? The same applies to games like mario party DS. It's clear as day that review scores don't correlate to game sales at all. What's funny is that your trying to back up a dead point by down playing someone's question. Marketing is just another excuse as to why you can't explain the difference in games sales across the board. No matter how good your marketing is it won't save trash like duke nukem forvever. Why did BF4 have lower sales than BF3 despite the fact that it had a bigger marketing campaign ? There's lot's of holes in your points that you can't fix.

Yes, let's go ahead and ask that one buddy.

If marketing means nothing to sales, why did it sell less?

If word of mouth from gamers means nothing, why did it sell less? 

If reviews mean nothing, why did it sell less?

How can quality be known to be less, if people don't play it?

How then, is it possible for a sequel to a very hyped and liked game, sell less than it's predecessor?  You can't say it was reviewed less, because that doesn't matter.  You can't say that gamer's didn't enjoy it, because word of mouth doesn't matter.  You also can't say it was marketed poorly, because that doesn't matter.  And, according to you, you also can't say sales are indicative of it's quality, because how would someone know if a game is good if they havent played it without reviews, marketing, or word of mouth?  Why don't you formulate some crazy response to that one.