DonFerrari said:
I'll put the "greatest hits" definition for PS1, that started at over 150k sold... that is certainly a lot less than 1.5M so we can decide what is crap... maybe this guy think only 20 games a gen are worth anything and all the rest is garbage. When Sony introduced the program for PlayStation in 1997, games could become Greatest Hits titles after selling at least 150,000 copies and being on the market for at least a year.[2] Minimum sales required eventually rose to 250,000.[3] When the program came to PlayStation 2 in 2002, games could become Greatest Hits titles after selling at least 400,000 copies and being on the market for at least 9 months In 2006, Sony extended the Greatest Hits program to the PlayStation Portable.[5] To qualify, a title must be on the market for at least 9 months and have sold 250,000 copies or more. The Greatest Hits price for PlayStation Portable games typically begins at $19.99. On July 28, 2008, the program was introduced on the PlayStation 3. A PlayStation 3 game must be on the market for 10 months and sell at least 500,000 copies to meet the Greatest Hits criteria. PlayStation 3 Greatest Hits titles currently sell at $29.99. Since the PS4's release on November 15, 2013,[6] there have been four titles that have been named Greatest Hits for the PlayStation 4 with an as of yet unknown criteria for meeting the label.
So his criteria for crap is 3x bigger than Sony "Greatest Hits"... so anything that sells less than 10M must be very bad? He may not like any game on WiiU or X1 for the rest of the gen. |
He is using a wholly subjective metric: whatever fits and bolster his repetitive rhetoric, which is wholly off-topic.
NNK sold 3x the PS3 and 10x the PS requirement for a "greatest hit" lol.
PS: thank you, Mr. Ferrari.
