naruball said:
Are you simply going to ignore all the good games that have been released and didn't sell well? Quality does not equal sales. This has been discussed to death. Also, in terms of qualiy, Watch_Dogs has not received amazing reviews. If anything, it's extremely close to Infamous (82 vs 80) which has not sold anywhere near that, came out when there was nothing for ps4 for a longer time and is an exclusive. After getting an 80 the game was considered good (even average by some), but not great. How are things different with Watch_Dogs? How can the people who bought it have known that it would be a good game? It is thanks to hype that it got the sales. And I'm glad it did, cuz I like to see new IP's doing well and I've seen some very funny bits from the game that reviewers perhaps didn't catch while rushing to finish the game and wrtie the review. @bolded No they wouldn't. Not necessarily. In order for a game to sell you need many things including but usually a) interesting concept, b) hype, c) massive advertsing (especially for new IP's). The game could have turned out to be terrible and it would have still sold well (again, Dead Island says hello). Whether customers are satisfied with their purchase and consider a quality product can better be seen by looking at the legs that it'll have. It's obvious that Minecraft left many customers satisfied to achieve such continuous sales. Same with GTA and Mario games that keep on selling forever. "Where are the good games on PS4/X1 ?" Infamous is as good of a game as Watch_Dogs according to reviewers (meta) and users (average scores). Yet it sells less. Quality is not enough. Watch_Dogs was hyped since it was shown. It would have done well whether it was released now, five months ago or by Christmas. Lack of good games never helped much good games to sell. Ask Ninty fans and Pikmin 3 or Wonderful 101. Great games, yet disappointing sales despite the long droughts. |
"Are you simply going to ignore all the good games that have been released and didn't sell well? Quality does not equal sales. This has been discussed to death."
Name them. Go on - I dare you.
"Also, in terms of qualiy, Watch_Dogs has not received amazing reviews. "
Did you see me underline good? The WHOLE point is they DON'T have to be amazing to sell well.
"How can the people who bought it have known that it would be a good game? "
Two things: 1. Anyone with a little bit of sense knew it would (at the least) be good. 2. It wasn't that incredible yet it got those sales.
"Infamous is as good of a game as Watch_Dogs according to reviewers (meta) and users (average scores). Yet it sells less"
inFamous was on ONE platform. By how much is WD outselling it on PS4?
"Watch_Dogs was hyped since it was shown"
So what? Here's my point (which you obviously seem to have lost track of): Hey Mr. Publisher, if you made a good game for mid 2014 and gave it some publicity then chances are it would have made you a little richer.
"Ask Ninty fans and Pikmin 3 or Wonderful 101. Great games, yet disappointing sales despite the long droughts. "
Ignoring the fact that I am very, very well aware of those cases which is why I said X1/PS4. Not to mention that Wii U is failing. Or that Pikmin hardly has a huge fanbase. Or that Wonderful 101 (however good it may be) launched with a small user base and was yet another (aesthetically) kiddy game on Nintendo hardware. And how much advertisement did W101 get?
Now try and twist my words any way you like, but I proclaim that every single one of your comments have been nonsensical from the outset... EDIT: Ok maybe the last bit was too much.
