vivster said:
They aren't a studio. They are as much a conglomerate with many different studios as Sony. Yes, their individual sales of physical games are not bad. I'm not downplaying their success, I just try to give a bit of contrast here so people won't start "upplaying" it. I was merely pointing out that those physical sales do not paint the whole picture and there is a great number of games sold on the other platforms that are not tracked, shown by the huge amount of shop cards sold. Truth is, especially in this forum, you really need downplaying when successes are constantly overstated and unequal comparisons are brought to paint achievements greater than they actually are. Might as well call the thread "best selling physical games" since digital is conveniently ignored to make the success seem greater. |
LOL. Let's not play a silly semantics game. They have in-house divisions, part of what is a studio. They aren't a conglomerate as Sony as they have their hand in different businesses and subsidiaries, but this is a widely different debate. Not the same thing. It is all about Nintendo's in-house, first party games. Which dominated.
The PSN card argument is silly, since all online platforms allow paypal, or debit or creditcard purchase options. So it's in no way a reliable means of tracking digital. We do however have certain games with both retail and digital sales included. It's not a end all be all way of determining digital sales, and thus the amount of sales of what PSN cards could bring through Amazon purchases.
The last paragraph is funny, since this only comes from you when it's Nintendo.
