Really!! Agenda uh?

So Virtua Fighter is a more direct competitior to Killer Instinct than Mortal Kombat!

Mass Effect is a competitor to Halo series.

Pokemon is a competitor of Skyrim.

To be fair, every corporation have been a fish out of water at some point or another when 3rd party support isn't in their favor. Just look at the NES in Europe, without all of those lucrative exclusivity contracts to fall back on, Nintendo couldn't catch anywhere near as much momentum as they did in America and Japan.

Well you brought up fighters in the first place, so I'm just sayin'.

Unless you meant the platformers for whatever reason, in which case, I was comparing Sonic Adventure and Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee.

What I was saying is that, it is not fair to compare Killer Instinct and Soul Calibur.

Two type of fighting games that play totally different.

It's just like comparing 11 on 11 soccer with futsal/5 on 5 soccer. They're both soccer.

Virtua Fighter, Killer Instinct and Mortal Kombat were pretty much all competing against each other, yes. I wonder if you lived the arcade era of Fighting games. You'd know and understand that. But I would still like if you could explain in detail why you think they don't compete with each other. Is it the option to sidestep? The lack or inclusion of weapons? How the combo system works? The inclusion of ring outs or not? Other subsystems?

If you were talking about brawlers like Smash Bros, Power Stone and PS All Star, I'd give you a point. But when it comes to games like DoA, MK, SF, VF, SC, KI... Nope. They're all after the same crowd. 

As for your other comparisons, they're retarded.

Thanks for the compliment!

Sorry I can't come out eloquently enough for you.

Have a good day and hopefully you find somebody as smart as you to exchange opinions.

Considering when gaming became popular in the 80's, a lot of those kids (myself included) still play games to this day, typically of sony, they BOUGHT in to something at just the right time.

They have rabbit foot syndrome.

Look at it this way, before sony arrived gaming was getting more and MORE popular anyway (any arcade all over the world would be testiment to that)

3D gaming was about to boom anyway thanks to SEGA and the Virtua Fighter series.

Bottom line______________ is, sony get far more credit than they actually deserve, THEY GOT LUCKY.

Hence they are reality stars in my eyes, not A list celebrities like Atari, Nintendo, SEGA, Capcom, Namco, Konami, Taito and many more.

Well. I sure do know how to make good discussions.

As a fighting game enthusiast myself, I completely agree and am fully aware of this, but if we're talking strictly early adopters, a fighting game is a fighting game. Hell, Street Fighter IV being 2D didn't stop it from garnering universal praise (which I personally don't entirely agree with, but besides the point) and revitalizing interest in the 2D fighting genre.

The problem with KI3 is that it's been a dormant franchise for over a decade and a half, it has literally had nothing since 1997 and doesn't fundamentally offer anything we're not already seeing on current gen systems, compare that to Soul Calibur scalding every other fighter released before it from a technical standpoint.

The main thing being though, which MikeRox pointed out, promising launch line-ups aren't always a vote of confidence, that's my point.

Motorstorm sold abysmally at launch. But it saw a massive sales boost in 2007, probably due to these... http://www.gamefaqs.com/ps3/928393-motorstorm/images/box-109240 - http://www.gamefaqs.com/ps3/928393-motorstorm/images/box-109239

Motorstorm: Pacific Rim performed much better at launch, but still modest sales. According to VGChartz it took about 2 years to break a million units.

Motorstorm: Apocalypse was a flop. It didn't break 400K.