By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
potato_hamster on 31 October 2015
Edit Thread
Wyrdness said:
potato_hamster said:

So Big Boss isn't highlighted as a central part to MGS5 in the trailers? Ohh right, he is. He is the main character after all. He is just as central, if not more central to the game as Miis are to Tomodatchi Life,so please spare me on how its a bad analogy. Prove that the physical appearance of big Boss in MGS5 is not the primary reason that MGS outsold MGS4. That's essentially what you're asking me to prove. But you can't prove a negative., can you? You don't like it because it shows how wrong you are and your elitist attitude of "you can't grasp marketing approaches" is furthering the point that you really don't have a leg to stand on.

Again, your assertion requires you to prove that Miis are more appealing or more interesting to their audience than any other similar, generic avatar. Good luck with that.

Fire Emblem: Awakening could have sold beffer because of dozens of different reasons (like being bundled with a custom 3DS, or it being the highest rated fire emblem game ever). narrowing it down to "the approach" (whatever that means) as the primary reason without any evidence to support that is impossible. For example, prove that Fire Emblem: Awakening being bundled with a custom 3DS, or the fact that it is the highest rated fire emblem game ever was less of a factor in its sales success than "the approach". Seriously. Prove it.


It is a bad analogy because the are many flaws in that argument from the type of marketing approach to how the adverts are conducted to even the context, MGS is marketed as a cinematic experience much in the same way all the preious games have with trailers showing select bits of action and sometimes cryptic messages, TL on the other hand are are informal adds with people saying how they are creating Miis for fun. The two approaches are so different it makes your attempt at an argument here comical, a negative can proven that comment alone highlights your constant sidestepping, a poor argument like what you're pushing with all these flawed logics and broken analogies is what can't be proven.

That's easy for me I can just highlight sales of their games to show their style and approach connects better with consumers.

Desperation at it's finest, Awakening sold and was recieved better because of the new approach, the's plenty of evidence to support it like how all the other games are good and recieved well critically and their critical average is not even that far from Awakening either with the GBA game hitting around 90% average, TSS and POR hovering in the high 80s and such, quality was never an issue for the series. Custom 3DS' are limited edition and numerous games have those, what changed in Awakening was the approach and what further proves my point is how Fates has sold just as well in Japan following up on the same approach no bundle there either. The previous titles had the same approach and sold poorly while the two new games utilized a new approach and have so far had consistently good sales, evidence is there even if you try hard to not see it.

Well you definitely haven't played MGS5 if you think it was marketed as, or was a "cinematic experience". There was about 90% less cutscenes and time spent watching cutscenes compared to MGS5. This was a point that was continuously repeated by Kojima and other Konami staff. On the other hand, based on the Tomodachi Life ads and articles i've seen, the fact that you were using Miis was a small part of the ads. The ads were mostly about that you could do with the characters you create, and the bottom line you could do that with literally any style of generic customizable avatar. Just because advertising obviously showed Miis in game doesn't mean that it continuously focused on the focused on the fact it was showing Miis. These are two different things that you appear to fail to be able to differentiate.

The popularity of an item in no way indicates its quality or appeal. You can take a new IP that 95% of people who play it enjoy (let's call it Game A), and another new IP that 70% of people who play it enjoy (let's call it Game B). Now let's say you heavily market Game A and don't market Game B at all. Then, as it turns out Game A sells 15 times more than Game B. Is Game A more appealing than Game B? Obviously not.  This is a prime example of an "Appeal to the People fallacy". It is quite obvious then that you have not proven anything. You are literally assuming this game that so happens to feature Miis sold because it featured Miis. You do not have any way of knowing this, and you have come anywhere close to providing any type of proof of that.

Again - what do you mean by "new approach"? This doesn't mean anything. If this describes everything that makes Awakening differernt than its predecessor, including gameplay, marketing, price, distribution, advertising, bundling, etc. - then I guess you're right, but that is such an incredibly generic term that it isn't any bit meaningful. The way you can completely dismiss other plausible reasons without any evidence to support it other than "other games reviewed well" (but not as well, so it definitely could be a factor) , and "there were limited numbers of the bundle"(but you don't know if that means there were 75,000 bundles sold, or 750,000 bundles sold) just goes to show how you are blatantly guessing as to why Awakening sold well. Don't believe me? Tell me the dominant primary reason why MGS5 sold better than MGS4. Please go ahead, and be ready to demonstrate why the 10 other equally plausible reasons I'll list in response are definitely not the primary reason why MGS5 sold better than MGS4.