Hey guys, guess wath, GH iz betta than Mass effect omgwtfbbq

 Ben, why not? No one will be buying the identical game for two consoles. so the only way to argue might be by using the user base (a la stof). Still, justlooking at overall sales, I find it astounding that the game is keeping up so well with arguably the biggest Wii game of 2007.

Fun Fact: This topic is pretty useless considering it is a well known fact that Wii games sell better over time than titles from other systems. Stating the obvious is not interesting as far as I am concerned.

Fun Fact 2: I like how the sonyboys (Crazzyman, where are you?) always complain about this site being 'biased', yet do nothing but troll threads like this with their usual crap.

As for Galaxy, it’s just another Mario game, you say? Then Assasins Creed is just another Prince of Persia. That game did nothing but build on its predecessors and make use of some new technology - somewhat like what Galaxy did, except Mario didn’t stay in the middle east.

 so it  is stating the obvious that assasins creed is tracking above Mario after 11 weeks? hm, interesting, didnt know it was a given.

"I don't get why we're even arguing about the sales of a game on TWO consoles vs. a game on ONE."

Because its the same game? Porting costs are apparently not that big so total sales on all available platforms is the number that matters. (Its also the number devs look to when they decide which platform to develop for)

Faxandu: Yes, everyone who compares the sales' trends will see this obvious fact. The need to make a thread of it is somewhat dubious, however.

And yes, there is a difference between multiplatform and exclusive games - how many people who owned only an Xbox 360 would have bought the game if it had been a PS3 exclusive? Not many. Since Galaxy was only released on one console (with a largely separate userbase) it could possibly have doubled its sales by now. Of course, sales trends show people are buying Wii's along with the game, but it's unlikely that every microsonyboy is going to end up with one so it will never be a truly fair comparison.

I will not discuss which title is probably better. That is a matter of preference, and priority. I will say this being one of the established franchises lets Mario get away with things other games wouldn't be allowed to get away with. The past does color the future. I would also say what are these bugs in Assassins Creed people are talking about they must be rather innocuous, because I don't recall seeing them.

Anyway its easier to be impressed with the sales of Assassins Creed. While the combined user base is larger. The respective libraries on those platforms are not only larger, but more varied. The game sold so well in spite of consumers having a lot of great choices. You could say Mario sold well in spite of consumers not having any real choices. Thats the tragedy of the holiday season I wanted to see whether Brawl or Mario would win, and a little voice tells me that is part of why the title was delayed. Brawl might have undone Mario.

I guess what I am saying is this Mario was a gem in a pile of garbage. While Assassins Creed was a gem in a pile of gems. Last years Wii library wasn't exactly spectacular. Every Nintendo fanatic had three games on their list Mario, Smash, and Metroid. Nintendo then only delivered two. The competition was hardly fierce by any stretch of the imagination.

Assassins Creed however had to go against the likes of Ratchet, Drake, Halo, Bioshock, The Orange Box, Call of Duty, and a plethora of genre variety. Most especially on the 360 which had a very verbose second half of its year. The result Assassins Creed had to earn what it got. While Mario got his sales on a silver platter.

I think the only question is which library will bury the respective titles faster. Were the Wii to get a lot of games of the moment the sales of Galaxy would be hurt. Consumers would put off the purchase. While if the other consoles keep a strong lineup the same holds true. I think Brawl and Mariokart will hurt Galaxy sales, but in the end I think titles like Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, Little Big Planet, Devil May Cry, and Gran Tourismo will bury the title towards the back of the shelf.

These titles will have legs only as long as nobody walks over them. So when you say any one of these titles will have long legs your equally saying that they will not face stiff competition from new releases.

 4 main series, yes, but look at how many games just have mario in the title

 http://vgchartz.com/games/index.php?name=mario&console=&publisher=&genre=&keyword=&order=Last+Updated

Most here bashing one game or another seem very fanboyish: OMG, Super Mario Galaxy is the bazillionth incarnation of Mario, the game sucks. OMG, there is a glitch in this scene in Assassins Creed, the game sucks. With this stance you find for every game a reason, why it must suck. It's more about wishs, which game should do better. Maybe it's the Millionth Mario, but as long as the gameplay, the graphics, the control is fresh enough and well polished to be fun - then it's fun. Maybe Assassins Creed has some glitches, but the gameplay ideas are fresh and well made, so it's fun for most of the people. That's the formula: Good games make fun, bad games don't do. For me as someone who own none of them it seems, that both games are fun. I gave my reasoning why I don't own them. But I think most of the owners of the two games have much fun with it.

I pointed out the userbase. What you say is exactly what I trying to say all the time.