"It doesn't have to follow a "winning formula" at all. I can name a bunch of games that have took steps back on previous games in a series. GTA4 being a prime example, removing all the "fun" of GTA:SA, yet selling VERY well due to being called Grand Theft Auto."

But it was hard to tell at first, which is why the legs showed the fun hurt the game. It was easy to tell with this game. Look at the ads for III, VC, SA, IV, and the other 3D games. You see loads of gameplay footage showing the protagonists wreaking awesome havoc. You do not see that with CW. You see some drawings and gameplay that barely shows anything.

"Gears of War 2. The main pull for the game was the online, and the online was TERRIBLE. Yet it still managed to do blockbuster numbers."

Gears 1 has online. Are you confusing that with Halo 2? And if so, that game was considered to have better online than the single player.

"Modern Warfare 2. A huge letdown when compared to the original Modern Warfare. Yet look at the sales of THAT. You think it would have sold so well if it was called "World at War 2"?"

In all these cases, you are applying this to people who bought and played the games. Modern Warfare looked to continue the themes of the first MW, and that is why they bought it.

This is about people who looked at CW and decided they didn't want it in the first place. If the game disappoints people just looking at the marketing, there is something wrong.

Using Halo as an example is stupid. It's a MS owned IP and would appear on either 360, Zune or Xbox Live. Nothing else.

1. Zune has nowhere NEAR the install base of DS. Although a Halo game would move a lot of Zune's, due to the Halo faithful.

2. On Xbox Live, it would break 1 Million easily, proably within a Month. The Halo crowd would eat it up straight away, just like they did with ODST and Halo Wars (The best selling RTS on consoles).

3. If it WAS on something other than any of the above. And was on, for example, PSP... It would still sell quite well due to the demographics of the platform. Probably 2-3 Million.

But, your last paragraph has me thinking... Do you think that GTA should stay away from DS and/or Wii? Due to the audience being on the HD consoles?

Gears 1 has excellent online. It was one of the most played titles on Xbox Live for a LONG time. Probably in the top 3, i can't remember that well... Gears 2 online promised bigger and better stuff. It had 5vs5, which was great, but was also a laggy mess. It was terrible. You couldn't get into a game without waiting 5 minutes to connect... Yet it still sold well due to the popularity of the 1st game.

Halo 2 to Halo 3 would be another great example. Halo 3 is vastly thought to be the worst in the series, yet it is also the best selling.

Modern Warfare 2 was bought because it was the sequel to the best FPS ever created

I can agree that the marketting was a big factor for it not selling so well.

"2. On Xbox Live, it would break 1 Million easily, proably within a Month. The Halo crowd would eat it up straight away, just like they did with ODST and Halo Wars (The best selling RTS on consoles)."

2D shooters aren't as big as strategy games right now, so assuming sales would be that fast shows you aren't looking at the bigger picture. They wouldn't buy it because it would have Halo in the name. They would buy it because it ALSO looks like a game they want. If they don't want a 2D shooter, they will not buy it.

"I can agree that the marketting was a big factor for it not selling so well."

Trust me, that killed it far more than a sixth of the userbase buying Nintendogs.

I mean, is there any part of the game that could look like the 3D GTA ads, even from the top-down? That could have at least given an impression of the action. As it was, it looked like all flash and no substance ("Look at the pretty pictures!"), which made me personally not want to touch it.

God, you guys still going at it? Give it a rest, already. XD

-sigh-

I'm dropping this after this post, like i said i was going to a while back (but for some reason didn't). We are getting nowhere, and when i DO reply my browser decides it wants to shut down on me ¬_¬

To answer your question Soriku -
I think it sold bad due to a number of reasons. After looking at the advertising, i can see that it would have played a big part. Also adding to the fact that a big portion of GTA fans are on PS3/360 wouldn't help it either...

You guys think it sold well, for whatever reason. I'm through caring, this thread is giving me a headache.

Done.

i have never read so much fanboy BS in one thread.

There is plenty of good reasons give why hitting 1million is a good accomplishment for this game yet you all come back swinging with it sold shit for a GTA game and ds has like 120million units.

Using Halo isn't stupid, it's the POINT. It's an IP that has only appeared on a certain console, and would be taking a leap to consoles of different brands.

And Xbox live is out of this arguement. You're talking about something that suddenly would go from costing 30 dollars retail, to about 10. Please.

Your 3rd point is right on: ON THE PSP THE GTA FRANCHISE WOULD SELL TO IT'S DEMOGRAPHICS, being 14-20 year old boys who don't appreciate retro gaming, or a myriad of other game types that appear on the DS. Something I've already said before, but was mocked about. The DS has a different market, and A HUGE VARIETY OF GAMES TO CHOOSE FROM. If you own a PSP, you don't have that variety, probably aren't looking for it, and would die to have a GTA portable game.

DS owners look at it, and figure they'll give it a chance later. After they buy all the other games they want.

Thank you for helping me argue against you. :)

Oh, and also, your point about GTA 4 having less content but outselling previous games only reinforces my point about fans of graphics who buy GTA games.

So here is a question to all those who call this a failure:

WHY DID YOU NOT BUY THIS GTA GAME?