LudicrousSpeed said:
It's easy to just throw out games as if they are anything more than an exception to the rule, but if you apply logic and context you can see why this is just another irrelevant deflection. Halo 3 sold a lot for various reasons. One big reason is similar to the Nintendo games, lack of competition. It came around before CoD4 exploded, and before Battlefield became a legitimate franchise on consoles. Also, hype. I can't think of a single game as hyped as Halo 3, except maybe Modern Warfare 2. You could be puming gas at 7-11 and instead of thanking you for your business, the gas pump would tell you to remember to go inside and preorder your copy of Halo 3. It was ridiculous. Lastly, Halo as a brand was stronger then. You and others act as if people talking about userbase are saying it's entirely the userbase. We have said it's also franchise fatigue, and stronger competition. It's just good old fashion common sense. |
The guys we have been discussing want to credit it more to userbase than to franchise getting weaker and competition getting stronger.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
