Europe doesn't really have a thing for Nintendo anymore, so this isn't any surprise to me. Though, one thing is certain: Mario 3D World will outsell Knack lifetime, guaranteed! If i'm wrong, i'll eat my own solid waste...
Looking here http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly/41602/Global/
I see that Super Mario 3d World is on the 7th place in world rankings. And Knack isn't even in top 75... So all this UK bullshit is just out of proportion, who cares of 3-4 thousand sales from the people with a bad gaming tastes...
| Yakuzaice said:
If you are using the number in comparison to actual numbers, then I would say it goes beyond just an example number. You didn't say that word for word, but what exactly was "None of those games were up against a console launch, let alone two of them. As you say, 3D Land had AC:R, SR3, Halo HD, and Zelda SS all launching the same week... 3D World has every PS4 launch title launching the same week." supposed to mean? Certainly seems to be minimizing the conditions for the other releases. I'm sure you'll take umbrage with me quoting you again, but this is the reason I initially made that first post. "The point I'm making here is, it debuted at 14 because it was released at the same time as a new console launch, and a week after another new console launch. Note that Super Mario 3D Land debuted at 9th in the UK. It has now sold 8.7 million copies worldwide and 560,000 copies in the UK." You were making justifications for the placement this week while using the somewhat low placement of 3D Land as evidence that it could have a large LTD. You keep going on and on about context, yet you took such issue with my first post which was giving context to the positions of the previous three 3D Mario games. Then, when you put out your hypothetical number for 3D World I put it in context of the previous week that contained a console launch, and the week of 3D Land. Instead of addressing any of that you spent around half your post complaining that I had lost track of the argument. Let's look back at it shall we? Pavolink made a post, you quoted less than a third of it, and then only addressed about half of that third. That was Pavolink's solitary post in this thread. I really jumped into the middle of a heated debate there. Not that I think he had some doctoral thesis hidden within his post, but it seems you did the same thing you are accusing me of. At the very least you admit I addressed individual sentences. Poor Pavolink seems to have only had the "14" and "flop" portion of his post addressed. |
I didn't use it in actual comparison, I used it as an EXAMPLE. As in "if it sold this many, would it still be a flop, considering <other games that sold similar numbers at release>?" - and then provided reasoning for why it could be that many. It's called a thought experiment, performed because we can't, currently, look at real data for it.
And I never asserted that coming in 14th meant it would have a large total in the future. I used it to demonstrate that release week numbers do not strongly correlate with long-term sales numbers. A rather straightforward assertion that I then backed up with examples, speculated numbers (that were clearly marked as speculative) based on what we do know, and basic logical thought. What you then did was jump in and go "But 3D Land had these big games launching at the same day!", which simultaneously proved my point and showed a complete disregard for the discussion at hand, which was 3D World being outsold by things launching the same day.
I didn't assert some grand debate, I said you jumped into the argument. Pavolink asserted that 3D World being 14th meant it was a flop (although he did so in a far less elaborate manner than I just did). I pointed out that there is no reason to assume so, given that we don't have numbers, and even if we did, a weak first week wouldn't necessarily mean a flop.
You suggest I did the same to pavolink that you did to me... not true. Pavolink was talking about "terrible Mario sales", and called the game a flop. I pointed out that it was too early to make that declaration. I did trim the first line of his post out of my quote, but only because it wasn't necessary for the discussion - it was the theme of his post that I was responding to, with the quoted line epitomising the entire post.
You, on the other hand, quoted my entire post, but ignored the content and the context in order to argue over a completely tangential thing based on my comparison of 3D World's week 1 sales to 3D Land's week 1 sales as a demonstration for why it's too early to call it a flop. The whole POINT of that comparison was to say "it's too early to call it a flop" - not "it's going to sell better" or "it sold better than you think", but "it's too early to call it a flop" - a direct response to his ENTIRE post. The context of my post, and of his, were in complete alignment. Yours... not so much.
Now, you're probably going to complain about how I trimmed out your last paragraph. I did it because it was completely irrelevant, and an attempt by you to apply yet another logical fallacy in a misguided attempt to show me up. What I predicted last year is irrelevant to my words of "don't get ahead of yourself" now.
| Jizz_Beard_thePirate said: Yes Yes... And Cod outsells nearly every game out there in its first week... But yes... it is sad |
Not this year lol. COD sales are way down this year :D.
What the hell is knack????????
Zelda - Breath of the Wild for Nintendo Switch.... Incredable!!!
| Ultravolt said: Europe doesn't really have a thing for Nintendo anymore, so this isn't any surprise to me. Though, one thing is certain: Mario 3D World will outsell Knack lifetime, guaranteed! If i'm wrong, i'll eat my own solid waste... |
Don't worry about having to eat your own solid waste because its already beating Knack worldwide anyway lol.
Devil_Survivor said:
|
It did that even before launched in Europe
| Aielyn said:
I didn't use it in actual comparison, I used it as an EXAMPLE. As in "if it sold this many, would it still be a flop, considering ?" - and then provided reasoning for why it could be that many. It's called a thought experiment, performed because we can't, currently, look at real data for it. And I never asserted that coming in 14th meant it would have a large total in the future. I used it to demonstrate that release week numbers do not strongly correlate with long-term sales numbers. A rather straightforward assertion that I then backed up with examples, speculated numbers (that were clearly marked as speculative) based on what we do know, and basic logical thought. What you then did was jump in and go "But 3D Land had these big games launching at the same day!", which simultaneously proved my point and showed a complete disregard for the discussion at hand, which was 3D World being outsold by things launching the same day. I didn't assert some grand debate, I said you jumped into the argument. Pavolink asserted that 3D World being 14th meant it was a flop (although he did so in a far less elaborate manner than I just did). I pointed out that there is no reason to assume so, given that we don't have numbers, and even if we did, a weak first week wouldn't necessarily mean a flop. You suggest I did the same to pavolink that you did to me... not true. Pavolink was talking about "terrible Mario sales", and called the game a flop. I pointed out that it was too early to make that declaration. I did trim the first line of his post out of my quote, but only because it wasn't necessary for the discussion - it was the theme of his post that I was responding to, with the quoted line epitomising the entire post. You, on the other hand, quoted my entire post, but ignored the content and the context in order to argue over a completely tangential thing based on my comparison of 3D World's week 1 sales to 3D Land's week 1 sales as a demonstration for why it's too early to call it a flop. The whole POINT of that comparison was to say "it's too early to call it a flop" - not "it's going to sell better" or "it sold better than you think", but "it's too early to call it a flop" - a direct response to his ENTIRE post. The context of my post, and of his, were in complete alignment. Yours... not so much. Now, you're probably going to complain about how I trimmed out your last paragraph. I did it because it was completely irrelevant, and an attempt by you to apply yet another logical fallacy in a misguided attempt to show me up. What I predicted last year is irrelevant to my words of "don't get ahead of yourself" now. |
"So for it to sell around half the number of copies (and 3D Land had 5 days to sell in, whereas 3D World has had 2 days) isn't bad at all." You might argue this is a hypothetical, but it certainly seems you are making a judgement based on it.
It's funny how you keep framing what happened before I came in as an "argument" or a "discussion". Even if we ignore the part where he only made one post in this thread, why exactly should I not be allowed to comment on points in your post independent from your "discussion"?
If the context of your post and his were in complete alignment, then why did you make absolutely no mention of what potential hardware boost Mario caused. About half of his post was about moving consoles. Where was all of that in your post? You seem to have done just about everything you're accusing me of.
Have you been anointed King of this thread or something? It seems like you get to decide on the theme of Pavolink's post. You decide who can participate in your argument. You decide what points in your post are allowed to be addressed. You decide what parts of my post are relevant. etc etc.
I didn't complain the previous time you trimmed my last paragraph, not sure why you think I am going to now. Though I fail to see how they were "completely irrelevant". both paragraphs which you trimmed contained responses to content in the quoted post. You had also never said the words "don't get ahead of yourself" in this thread before, so I don't see how it could be irrelevant to that either. You seem to play fast and loose with which parts of my posts you address when you've been accusing me of the same thing (not only talking about my references to your predictions last year.)
I still have no clue how you thought those numbers last year were remotely possible, but whatever.
| Yakuzaice said: I still have no clue how you thought those numbers last year were remotely possible, but whatever. |
At this point, I'm stopping this. You're continuing to ignore context. By the way, I couldn't possibly respond to the assertion that 3D World failed to move Wii U's, given that we had NO data on Wii U sales for that week, no sense of whether sales increased or decreased, no sense of ANYTHING relevant to Wii U system sales. There's a difference between responding to one of a set of points, and responding to a fragment of an argument without paying attention to the rest of the argument. Pavolink asserted three things. I responded to one of them. I asserted one thing, with a detailed explanation. You picked out one piece of that explanation, then argued against it without paying attention to the context, and thus completely missed what I was actually saying, and failed to actually address what I was talking about.
And you keep bringing up something that was a year old. At this point, I'm pretty confident that you're not arguing because of anything substantive, but because of some problem you have with me (and not what I've said in this thread). This is NOT the place for your little crusade.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
