| fatslob-:O said: You have yet to point out what's contradictory about my argument. It's not only me that doesn't care about those games, MANY don't either. Using the internet gaming community as a reference for appreciation is flawed on your part since it doesn't represent the reality. It's amusing how you keep claiming that my arguments are broken without even elaborating. Heavily successful ? Now that's an overstatement if I've ever seen one ... Comparing game quality to taste in food ?! What an irrelevant comparsion you've made right there. The only one derailing here is you because you do nothing but keep pitting these useless strawman points against me ... Marketing is only one aspect but it's not the main one. FYI, most of GC's so called "profits" came from the GBA. Again the sweet spot was $300 so been cheaper than that didn't much in the end ... |
Dude I've highlighted for a while what's contradicting you just read through your own posts, your many people don't care about certain games argument goes for many successful games as well your arguments at this point are loose and don't come together and it's becoming more clear that you improvized an argument to save face which has left you in a position of saying Shrek, Carnival Games and the like are better games then the majority of PS4/X1 games. The are various factors in Sales other then quality that drive them, Sonic's recent games have been bad with SB being terrible but it still sold decently because of the branding, I assure you that you could make a poor or mediocre game and stick any popular brand on it and it would outsell far better games.
I'll highlight one last time where you have contradicted yourself, you said in an earlier post that it's the consumer that quality matters to yet your focal points are that of the company, under your logic Michael Bay makes the best films because of his success when it's far from the truth if anything success is never an indicator of quality as quality is defined by the overall merits of the product itself, things we find out from playing them. A well made car will always be that regardless of how much it sells same with games, but this is where the contradictions begin you say that you only measure by success and profits yet the games you were trying to dismiss earlier have just that, on the M&L side Bowser's Inside Story has sold around 3.8m, Dream Team has sold about 1.8m while on the Paper Mario side TTYD sold 2.25m, SPM sold 3.69m and Sticker Star sold 2.13M.
Moving futher on Awakening sold 1.53m, with Golden Sun the original sold 1.75m and lost age sold 1.2m and when we come to Pokemon which consistently hits 10m each installment your original stance against them falls apart under your own very logic as these games are outselling most RPGs and matching the likes of series like Mass Effect which blows your whole stance about them not being top tier RPGs to pieces under the very logic you have just highlighted. If you don't want to admit contradiction here then fair enough keep arguing the stance as every post you add further mocks yous at this point.
Ironic you using strawman argument in your post as I've highlighted the flaws in your posts you haven't once countered any argument in this thread that people have put forward and instead have sidestepped all of them.
The position you're in right now with your argument is that your logic in sales equals quality flat out debunks yourself at the same time, at this point your only course of action will be to try and move goal posts again and start saying only a certain amount of sales count like how you tried to discount Golden Sun earlier as a first party RPG. You've put yourself in a situation where you can't argue quality on a game's merits which funny enough would have suited your stance better but instead you went with logic that actually countered your very own arguments earlier. Finally nope GC's profits games came from software sold on the platform like every other home console from Nintendo and the fact it made profits further stings your points.
Congratulations on that.
Essay Pro