potato_hamster said:
This is actually just pathetic at this point. So your logic is: A game was marketed as featuring Miis, the game sold well, therefore the game sold well because it featured Miis. Correct?
So try this logic: Metal Gear Solid V was marketed as featuring a horn sticking out of the main character's forehead, the game sold well, therefore the game sold well because it featured a horn sticking out of the main character's forehead. But the marketing also featured story, drivable vehicles, soldier recruiting, base building, online multiplayer. But let me tell you, it definitely, definitely sold well because it featured that horn. That is definitely the primary reason, because I say so. My proof? The marketing of course, it did feature a main character with a horn sticking out of his head.
Tomodachi Life's success could be due to any number of reasons - fun gameplay, enjoyable story, great sound, entertaining dialog, great minigames, etc. What was the primary reason for it's success? I have absolutely no idea, and neither do you! You have zero evidence that Tomodachi Life sold like it did because it featured Miis more than it sold like it did because the dialog was entertaining. You're simply speculating that the reason behind it is because it featured Miis. The truth of the matter is that Miis are literally no more unique than any other user-created avatar system. There is nothing that makes them inherently better, and there's nothing about their shape or art style that make their inclusion in a game objectively better than a game that features similar but different avatars. None at all.
Why didn't Sims sell well on 3DS and Tomodachi Life did? It could be due to any number of reasons, such as: 99% of third party games sell terribly on Nintendo platforms, whereas games developed and published by Nintendo tend to do very poorly. It could be because the game was poorly made and ran horribly, and Tomodachi Life was made better. It could be because the Sims 3 was released on pretty much every platform out there including the DS, and TD was only available on the 3DS meaning it was the only way to get the TD experience etc. etc. There a dozens of reasons why two similar games can perform dramatically different, and 99.9999% of them do not feature Miis, so why are Miis suddenly the deciding factor between why TD sold well and Sims 3 sold poorly?
PS. Sequels are not new IPs in any way.
|
Broken analogy, go and watch the adverts yourself a number of them even go into details of promoting and focusing on the Miis what's pathetic is your refusal to accept this was a draw for the game, MGS' marketing approach didn't dedicate adverts solely to BB, they were more cryptic and utilized suspense as opposed to TL which were more informal with people talking about Miis and the fun of making Miis out of yourself and friends (that is literally all the adverts are). For a reference Mysims on the DS had it's own approach to look close to Miis and sold very well around 3m so Sims 3 not even coming close to it highlights the's an element of appeal that went missing. Marketing Miis would mean the would need to be a draw for customers to them, if the was no draw to the Miis like you claim no one would have bought the game, Miis factored into grabbing people's attention and everything else in the game then took over.
Who said anything about avatars being better then each other? They have their own stylized quirks and charms which can define their appeal to people, they don't have to be better then other avatars they just have to be shown as interesting to the target audience which the TL marketing did for Miis. They're simple, have a quirky cartoon like style and can be given a voice and personality, very easy for consumers to get into them and thus appealing to the target audience. Appeal can be just as crucial as gameplay as the game really connects with the consumer far better then it should, this is why Mario's face and name on something can make it sell because of appeal.
