By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales - Looks like GT5's sales performance is making a lot of haters silent..

jarrod on 10 January 2011
stopstopp said:

True it does, but I was just mearly making a point. You can't say GT PSP bombed if you don't say Mario Kart DS bombed.

Although considering GT5 sales are still in it's infancy, no, I don't consider it a bomb.

Uh, yes you can.  Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous Mario Kart, it was an unheralded success by series standards.  GT PSP far undersold every previous GT, it was an unheralded failure by series standards.  Your point literally has zero merit.

I wouldn't consider GT5 a bomb either fwiw.



Around the Network
stopstopp on 10 January 2011
jarrod said:
stopstopp said:

True it does, but I was just mearly making a point. You can't say GT PSP bombed if you don't say Mario Kart DS bombed.

Although considering GT5 sales are still in it's infancy, no, I don't consider it a bomb.

Uh, yes you can.  Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous Mario Kart, it was an unheralded success by series standards.  GT PSP far undersold every previous GT, it was an unheralded failure by series standards.  Your point literally has zero merit.

I wouldn't consider GT5 a bomb either fwiw.

Considering DS seems to be on track on outselling every nintendo home console that isn't wii combined, no wonder it sold more.

Considering PSP looks like it could become the worst selling Sony console (if the successor comes out this year) plus the fact that it is a handheld (which gives it absolutely no chance unless it is in DS's position, which it would half to have over 250 million consoles to do so) no wonder it sold less.

Still doesn't change that Mario Kart DS is a bomb compared to console versions, as is the same for GT PSP.



jarrod on 10 January 2011
pezus said:
jarrod said:
pezus said:
jarrod said:
pezus said:

Lol, holding up? It's massively up on GT4 in its biggest and by far the most important region. 

It's ahead simply due to the holiday launch timing, you're comparing apples with oranges here.  And despite the holiday, America and Japan aren't faring quite so well... look at the larger picture.

Besides which, GT4 was the 2nd series entry on PS2, there's invariably some franchise fatigue at play there.  This goes for most big PS2 series (MGS3, FFXII, DMC2/3, Mingol 4, Tekken 5, SC3, etc, etc)... the standard for initial current gen entries should really be the initial PS2 entries anyway, as both have the "first mover" franchise appeal.

So, do you think it will start falling behind GT4 in Europe soon then?

The only reason GT3 sold more than GT4 is because it was heavily bundled in America. GT4 sold more than 3 in Europe so it's actually growing there.

GT5 is the second GT entry on PS3 to many PS3 owners. 5 million have it so I think that's fair to say.

I think GT4's first full year will be ahead of GT5 worldwide.   I do think GT5 might sell comparably overall in Europe, but in America and Japan there's pretty much no hope of it catching GT4 (and thus, hitting 10m).

I think Prologue is dicey, but yeah I agree it did take some of that "first mover" appeal away from GT5 proper.  Then again, this was also something I talked about before GT5 released, and I was endlessly assured it wouldn't be the case by the usual GT cheerleaders.   

Why is there no hope in America? It's already reached about 1.3 million there (GT4 sold just 2.84 million there) and I think it can reach 2.5-3 million eventually. So if we assume EMEAA will have the same or slightly better sales than GT4 (6.5-7 million) it only needs 3-3.5 million more from America and Japan. Assuming it will get close to 700k in Japan (without possible bundles) it only needs 2.3-2.8 million more from America. 

I see this scenario as quite likely actually and this "no hope" phrase you keep using bears no meaning. 

Oh, and btw, it doesn't have to sell on par with GT4 to reach 10m since GT4 sold 10.6 million (shipped close to 11m).

GT5 was already bundled in Japan (with a new color PS3 even).  And America too it turns out, though they were extremely limited here (Best Buy only, limited quantities, and initially only for a TV deal).

I just don't see GT5 tripling it's US sales, which is basically what it'll need to hit that milestone.  And honestly, even 700k Japan is looking ambitious at this point... it's probably going to do less than that there.



jarrod on 10 January 2011
stopstopp said:
jarrod said:
stopstopp said:

True it does, but I was just mearly making a point. You can't say GT PSP bombed if you don't say Mario Kart DS bombed.

Although considering GT5 sales are still in it's infancy, no, I don't consider it a bomb.

Uh, yes you can.  Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous Mario Kart, it was an unheralded success by series standards.  GT PSP far undersold every previous GT, it was an unheralded failure by series standards.  Your point literally has zero merit.

I wouldn't consider GT5 a bomb either fwiw.

Considering DS seems to be on track on outselling every nintendo home console that isn't wii combined, no wonder it sold more.

Considering PSP looks like it could become the worst selling Sony console (if the successor comes out this year) plus the fact that it is a handheld (which gives it absolutely no chance unless it is in DS's position, which it would half to have over 250 million consoles to do so) no wonder it sold less.

Still doesn't change that Mario Kart DS is a bomb compared to console versions, as is the same for GT PSP.


lol, no it's not at all "the same" by any stretch... chiefly because Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous console version of the series.  This isn't rocket science here, I'm not sure why you can't seem to grasp "by series standards" and "ratio arguments inherently favor smaller bases"? 



jarrod on 10 January 2011
pezus said:
jarrod said:
stopstopp said:

True it does, but I was just mearly making a point. You can't say GT PSP bombed if you don't say Mario Kart DS bombed.

Although considering GT5 sales are still in it's infancy, no, I don't consider it a bomb.

Uh, yes you can.  Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous Mario Kart, it was an unheralded success by series standards.  GT PSP far undersold every previous GT, it was an unheralded failure by series standards.  Your point literally has zero merit.

I wouldn't consider GT5 a bomb either fwiw.

I doubt Sony expected GT PSP to sell as well as GT on consoles. The game is not a full release imo (lots of stuff lacking from console versions).

I don't disagree entirely, but I also don't think they expected it to sell as little as it did either.

IMO, Sony would've been better off just porting GT4 to PSP early on like they originally intended and promised.  I think a full GT experience a few years earlier, even if a port, would have sold significantly better than what we got with GT PSP.



Around the Network
stopstopp on 10 January 2011
jarrod said:
stopstopp said:
jarrod said:
stopstopp said:

True it does, but I was just mearly making a point. You can't say GT PSP bombed if you don't say Mario Kart DS bombed.

Although considering GT5 sales are still in it's infancy, no, I don't consider it a bomb.

Uh, yes you can.  Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous Mario Kart, it was an unheralded success by series standards.  GT PSP far undersold every previous GT, it was an unheralded failure by series standards.  Your point literally has zero merit.

I wouldn't consider GT5 a bomb either fwiw.

Considering DS seems to be on track on outselling every nintendo home console that isn't wii combined, no wonder it sold more.

Considering PSP looks like it could become the worst selling Sony console (if the successor comes out this year) plus the fact that it is a handheld (which gives it absolutely no chance unless it is in DS's position, which it would half to have over 250 million consoles to do so) no wonder it sold less.

Still doesn't change that Mario Kart DS is a bomb compared to console versions, as is the same for GT PSP.


lol, no it's not at all "the same" by any stretch... chiefly because Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous console version of the series.  This isn't rocket science here, I'm not sure why you can't seem to grasp "by series standards" and "ratio arguments inherently favor smaller bases"? 

And your by series standards argument favor bigger bases. Nintendos total and utter failure with N64 and Gamecube just makes Mario Kart DS look good. Mario Kart DS was a success by series standards but a complete and total failure by ratio. Infact Mario Kart DS couldn't even sell more than the SNES N64 and GC versions combined despite having 40 million more consoles than their consoles combined.

It seems we are at a stalemate, our arguments use two different schools of thought and we aren't changing our opinions. I'm just leaving it at that.



jarrod on 10 January 2011
stopstopp said:
jarrod said:
stopstopp said:
jarrod said:
stopstopp said:

True it does, but I was just mearly making a point. You can't say GT PSP bombed if you don't say Mario Kart DS bombed.

Although considering GT5 sales are still in it's infancy, no, I don't consider it a bomb.

Uh, yes you can.  Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous Mario Kart, it was an unheralded success by series standards.  GT PSP far undersold every previous GT, it was an unheralded failure by series standards.  Your point literally has zero merit.

I wouldn't consider GT5 a bomb either fwiw.

Considering DS seems to be on track on outselling every nintendo home console that isn't wii combined, no wonder it sold more.

Considering PSP looks like it could become the worst selling Sony console (if the successor comes out this year) plus the fact that it is a handheld (which gives it absolutely no chance unless it is in DS's position, which it would half to have over 250 million consoles to do so) no wonder it sold less.

Still doesn't change that Mario Kart DS is a bomb compared to console versions, as is the same for GT PSP.


lol, no it's not at all "the same" by any stretch... chiefly because Mario Kart DS far outsold every previous console version of the series.  This isn't rocket science here, I'm not sure why you can't seem to grasp "by series standards" and "ratio arguments inherently favor smaller bases"? 

And your by series standards argument favor bigger bases. Nintendos total and utter failure with N64 and Gamecube just makes Mario Kart DS look good. Mario Kart DS was a success by series standards but a complete and total failure by ratio. Infact Mario Kart DS couldn't even sell more than the SNES N64 and GC versions combined despite having 40 million more consoles than their consoles combined.

It seems we are at a stalemate, our arguments use two different schools of thought and we aren't changing our opinions. I'm just leaving it at that.

Uh, Mario Kart DS also sold favorably to the SNES and GBA versions.  It's not simply a total userbase thing here, it did exceedingly well by any standard.

And we're not at a "stalemate", your reaching argument to somehow use ratio to make Mario Kart DS look disappointing doesn't even work... it has a better sellthrough ratio than literally every single game ever released on PS2... if you're trying to somehow twist reality so you can argue MKDS is a bomb, then you also consider every single game ever released on PS2 to be a bomb as well?  Gee, no wonder you're so eager to leave it at that. lol.



Kasz216 on 10 January 2011
Hynad said:
Kasz216 said:
slowmo said:
Kasz216 said:
slowmo said:
Kasz216 said:
Dallinor said:
Kasz216 said:
Mordred11 said:

LOL @ people still comparing MK with GT5,the two games have nothing to do with eachother.

It's like comparing Avatar and Inception

 You know, you really set yourself up for a HUGE troll comment there.

Comaping a good movie (Inception) with a bad movie (avatar) that people only like because of it's amazing graphics and effects.

I can understand that is your opinion of the film but who made you the judge of what people like a movie for?

I personally found some of the core ideas in the film interesting, the action was great, the pacing was good and the culture and life of the planet Pandora really allowed for a total suspension of disbelief and a strong engagement with the idea the film presented.

I think avatar was a decent movie, Inception was better, but I liked avatar for more than just it's visual splendor. 

The core ideas of the film were directly lifted from other films who executed them MUCH better.

Furthermore, that's less my opinion, but the general opinion of people as  a whole from what i've seen.

The vast majority of people who like it, like it for the effects.  If you liked it for the Dances with Wolves/Ferngully eque message and various bad but effective ways to get people invested like the "so evil i'm not a real person" character... good for you, but that's not even the majority reason for people who liked the movie.

What about all those people who watched Inception and went wtf and promptly turned off and consider it crap?  I believe Avatar appealed to far more people than Inception did and the general public as a whole would rate Avatar the better movie imo.

For the record I think Inception is a signficantly better film but I know a lot of people that would disagree with me.

I'm not sure how you'd prove that.  At the moment Inception is ahead of Avatar in the User Reviews at Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic which would seem to suggest the opposite.

Or rather, that Inception is seen as more favorable by those who have seen it then Avatar is by those who have seen it.


No proof its all anecdotal.  All I would say is user reviews online will quite blatantly be hopelessly skewed to a certain demographic.  I'm not here to prove you wrong anyway, I'm just saying there is a large number of people out there who would rate Avatar better than Inception,

You can find large groups of people who will do anything.

Heck, you could find a large number of people who think Bush junior was a better president then Clinton and a large groups of people who think Twighlight is better then Shakespheare. 

I would say the only think you could get people to agree on is that not getting kicked in the balls is better then getting in the balls... but then i'm reminded of sadomasichists. 

Avatar obviously appealed to a lot more people than Inception.  Just take a quick look at the amount of maney it made at the box office and how it keeps making a crapload of it.  Inception doesn't even come close to it. 

"Bla bla bla, but it's all about the graphickzzz!"

So? 

 

It still appealed to people much more than Inception.


No that proves a lot more people SAW Avatar.

Considering Avatar was and is billed as an expierence that everyone should see interested or not.



Hynad on 10 January 2011
Kasz216 said:
Hynad said:
Kasz216 said:
slowmo said:
Kasz216 said:
slowmo said:
Kasz216 said:
Dallinor said:
Kasz216 said:
Mordred11 said:

LOL @ people still comparing MK with GT5,the two games have nothing to do with eachother.

It's like comparing Avatar and Inception

 You know, you really set yourself up for a HUGE troll comment there.

Comaping a good movie (Inception) with a bad movie (avatar) that people only like because of it's amazing graphics and effects.

I can understand that is your opinion of the film but who made you the judge of what people like a movie for?

I personally found some of the core ideas in the film interesting, the action was great, the pacing was good and the culture and life of the planet Pandora really allowed for a total suspension of disbelief and a strong engagement with the idea the film presented.

I think avatar was a decent movie, Inception was better, but I liked avatar for more than just it's visual splendor. 

The core ideas of the film were directly lifted from other films who executed them MUCH better.

Furthermore, that's less my opinion, but the general opinion of people as  a whole from what i've seen.

The vast majority of people who like it, like it for the effects.  If you liked it for the Dances with Wolves/Ferngully eque message and various bad but effective ways to get people invested like the "so evil i'm not a real person" character... good for you, but that's not even the majority reason for people who liked the movie.

What about all those people who watched Inception and went wtf and promptly turned off and consider it crap?  I believe Avatar appealed to far more people than Inception did and the general public as a whole would rate Avatar the better movie imo.

For the record I think Inception is a signficantly better film but I know a lot of people that would disagree with me.

I'm not sure how you'd prove that.  At the moment Inception is ahead of Avatar in the User Reviews at Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic which would seem to suggest the opposite.

Or rather, that Inception is seen as more favorable by those who have seen it then Avatar is by those who have seen it.


No proof its all anecdotal.  All I would say is user reviews online will quite blatantly be hopelessly skewed to a certain demographic.  I'm not here to prove you wrong anyway, I'm just saying there is a large number of people out there who would rate Avatar better than Inception,

You can find large groups of people who will do anything.

Heck, you could find a large number of people who think Bush junior was a better president then Clinton and a large groups of people who think Twighlight is better then Shakespheare. 

I would say the only think you could get people to agree on is that not getting kicked in the balls is better then getting in the balls... but then i'm reminded of sadomasichists. 

Avatar obviously appealed to a lot more people than Inception.  Just take a quick look at the amount of maney it made at the box office and how it keeps making a crapload of it.  Inception doesn't even come close to it. 

"Bla bla bla, but it's all about the graphickzzz!"

So? 

 

It still appealed to people much more than Inception.


No that proves a lot more people SAW Avatar.

Considering Avatar was and is billed as an expierence that everyone should see interested or not.

Errr, you do know that you must pay to go to the movies, right?  And that before you pay for the movie, it must appeal to you, right?  *rolleyes

 

Avatar appealed to much more people.



Kasz216 on 10 January 2011
Hynad said:
Kasz216 said:
Hynad said:
Kasz216 said:
slowmo said:
Kasz216 said:
slowmo said:
Kasz216 said:
Dallinor said:
Kasz216 said:
Mordred11 said:

LOL @ people still comparing MK with GT5,the two games have nothing to do with eachother.

It's like comparing Avatar and Inception

 You know, you really set yourself up for a HUGE troll comment there.

Comaping a good movie (Inception) with a bad movie (avatar) that people only like because of it's amazing graphics and effects.

I can understand that is your opinion of the film but who made you the judge of what people like a movie for?

I personally found some of the core ideas in the film interesting, the action was great, the pacing was good and the culture and life of the planet Pandora really allowed for a total suspension of disbelief and a strong engagement with the idea the film presented.

I think avatar was a decent movie, Inception was better, but I liked avatar for more than just it's visual splendor. 

The core ideas of the film were directly lifted from other films who executed them MUCH better.

Furthermore, that's less my opinion, but the general opinion of people as  a whole from what i've seen.

The vast majority of people who like it, like it for the effects.  If you liked it for the Dances with Wolves/Ferngully eque message and various bad but effective ways to get people invested like the "so evil i'm not a real person" character... good for you, but that's not even the majority reason for people who liked the movie.

What about all those people who watched Inception and went wtf and promptly turned off and consider it crap?  I believe Avatar appealed to far more people than Inception did and the general public as a whole would rate Avatar the better movie imo.

For the record I think Inception is a signficantly better film but I know a lot of people that would disagree with me.

I'm not sure how you'd prove that.  At the moment Inception is ahead of Avatar in the User Reviews at Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic which would seem to suggest the opposite.

Or rather, that Inception is seen as more favorable by those who have seen it then Avatar is by those who have seen it.


No proof its all anecdotal.  All I would say is user reviews online will quite blatantly be hopelessly skewed to a certain demographic.  I'm not here to prove you wrong anyway, I'm just saying there is a large number of people out there who would rate Avatar better than Inception,

You can find large groups of people who will do anything.

Heck, you could find a large number of people who think Bush junior was a better president then Clinton and a large groups of people who think Twighlight is better then Shakespheare. 

I would say the only think you could get people to agree on is that not getting kicked in the balls is better then getting in the balls... but then i'm reminded of sadomasichists. 

Avatar obviously appealed to a lot more people than Inception.  Just take a quick look at the amount of maney it made at the box office and how it keeps making a crapload of it.  Inception doesn't even come close to it. 

"Bla bla bla, but it's all about the graphickzzz!"

So? 

 

It still appealed to people much more than Inception.


No that proves a lot more people SAW Avatar.

Considering Avatar was and is billed as an expierence that everyone should see interested or not.

Errr, you do know that you must pay to go to the movies, right?  And that before you pay for the movie, it must appeal to you, right?  *rolleyes

 

Avatar appealed to much more people.

Your going around in circles here.  Peole paid money to see it, very specifically because of the high end graphics and the 3d expierence being hyped up.