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

Forums - Gaming - Best Selling Console Does Not Equal Best Console.

Insidb on 06 December 2015
DonFerrari said:
Nintyfan90 said:

Riiiight.. So thats why the niche jrpgs the ps3 got sold like crap. Or why the top selling ps3 games look completely identical to the 360 top selling games besides the first party exclusives from each.


Please explain sold like crap... because selling like crap for me is being very bellow expectations. Those games sold enough to generate sequels. Some games can be considered very sucessfull by their dev by selling 100k-250k while others need 6M. So you can't put selling like crap for all of them in the sale general ruler.

And yet you think all of them were bought by the same people... you can be sure that more than 20% of PS3 userbase were made of niche buyers.

Just look at games besides shooters in USA sold more on PS3 even if they were almost half of the X360 userbase. That should be enough proof to you that diversity were more important to PS fans than MS.

"Sold like crap" < 1.5M

Sales for major JRPGS' last mainline entries: MH-3.58, FFXIII-5.3, DQ:IX-5.8, NNK-1.46 (first entry), YK2-5.8, SO:LH-1.5, P0/A-9



Around the Network
Puppyroach on 06 December 2015

Best selling console is not the best according to YOU, but this is such a subjective topic that there is no right or wrong. For me, any console with Halo and Gears is my console of choice, but I can see why people prefer PS4, WiiU or other consoles as well.



Carl on 06 December 2015
Nintyfan90 said:

You want proof? Ok here is your proof, neither of the other two could careless about it! Why can't Sony get the other jrpgs exclusively, like the ones that actually sell north of 3 million? They got souls exclusively, why not Dragon Quest? Why not final fantasy? Because they arent niche. Why would a major japanese developer choose PS4 exclusively? If they are gonna choose anything exclusively, 3ds would obviously be the best bet. Which is exactly what many major japanese franchises do, such as MH and YW. If they want better global sells, why leave xb1 out? The PS4 sells no where near enough for anyone to just ignore xb1. My point is, Sony isnt successful enough anywhere to get exclusives unless they are niche. Plain and simple. That clearly explains why the PS4s biggest jrpgs are SHARED. Now i really have nothing more to say and would rather not continue this off topic discussion something a mod could probably understand.


No, I asked for proof.

Show me proof. Dont give me some rubbish about others not caring, as if youre an official spokesperson. Stop moving goal posts, stop trying to piss people off and give me some proof about what has and what hasnt sold well. The whole point behind the post was that niche JP titles sold well on the PS3, which is why the PS4 is seeing similar (fantastic) support, so dont try and dismiss that without backing it up.



                            

Nintyfan90 on 06 December 2015
Insidb said:
Nintyfan90 said:
Insidb said:

Considering that everything you said is technically off-topic, it's not surprse that you completely overlook that these are the CONSOLE JRPGs that people buy. These are sales for the last entries in those franchises (in millions): MH-3.58, FFXIII-5.3, DQ:IX-5.8, NNK-1.46 (first entry), YK2-5.8, SO:LH-1.5, P0/A-9. So, unless your definition of "actually buy" is "sells on handheld platforms," "sells over 5.5M," or is named "Pokemon," these JRPGs are all "quite important." For reference, all of these games are way ahead of where the Tomb Raider is trending, yet that game was planned as a huge X1 system seller. E

As a JRPG fan myself, I buy them for my PS4 or my 3DS. My X1 is there for X1 exclusive (Halo, Forza, TR, KI, etc.), because the multiplates run better on PS4.

Oh god, yet again a Sony fan trying to seperate home consoles and handhelds lol, because japan clearly cares about the difference. Also your post is quite confusing, it clearly shows a huge difference between Poke, FF, DQ, and YK vs. NNK, SO:LH, and PO. This is off topic so ill leave it with this.

1) I won all 3 consoles.

2) Here is the OP:

"Wasn't the Wii the best selling console last generation.

 A best selling console can have a variety of variables. Price, launch date, adoption, etc.

............and finally the best selling console is not always the most powerful, again I use the Wii as an example.

 My Console of choice is Xbox One. You choose what you like.

 Just food for thought."

3) "Huge difference" = "actually buy" or no one = 8 million people? You are retreating, conflating, and misdirecting, but you're really just asserting an agenda.

4) Your handle is "Nintyfan90," and your bias is matching the name's expectation. Your repeated posts echo this bias, as you repeatedly bait people into conflict. 



What are you talking about? 8 million people refers to what? Nevermind I cant continue with you because your post are highly confusing. You even post a metric of less than 1.5M and name NNK which sold less.

Nintyfan90 on 06 December 2015
Carl2291 said:
Nintyfan90 said:

You want proof? Ok here is your proof, neither of the other two could careless about it! Why can't Sony get the other jrpgs exclusively, like the ones that actually sell north of 3 million? They got souls exclusively, why not Dragon Quest? Why not final fantasy? Because they arent niche. Why would a major japanese developer choose PS4 exclusively? If they are gonna choose anything exclusively, 3ds would obviously be the best bet. Which is exactly what many major japanese franchises do, such as MH and YW. If they want better global sells, why leave xb1 out? The PS4 sells no where near enough for anyone to just ignore xb1. My point is, Sony isnt successful enough anywhere to get exclusives unless they are niche. Plain and simple. That clearly explains why the PS4s biggest jrpgs are SHARED. Now i really have nothing more to say and would rather not continue this off topic discussion something a mod could probably understand.


No, I asked for proof.

Show me proof. Dont give me some rubbish about others not caring, as if youre an official spokesperson. Stop moving goal posts, stop trying to piss people off and give me some proof about what has and what hasnt sold well. The whole point behind the post was that niche JP titles sold well on the PS3, which is why the PS4 is seeing similar (fantastic) support, so dont try and dismiss that without backing it up.



Your proof they sold well?

Around the Network
Tootylicious on 06 December 2015

Somebody has to defend his Xbox One purchase...



DonFerrari on 06 December 2015
Nintyfan90 said:
DonFerrari said:
Nintyfan90 said:

Riiiight.. So thats why the niche jrpgs the ps3 got sold like crap. Or why the top selling ps3 games look completely identical to the 360 top selling games besides the first party exclusives from each.


Please explain sold like crap... because selling like crap for me is being very bellow expectations. Those games sold enough to generate sequels. Some games can be considered very sucessfull by their dev by selling 100k-250k while others need 6M. So you can't put selling like crap for all of them in the sale general ruler.

And yet you think all of them were bought by the same people... you can be sure that more than 20% of PS3 userbase were made of niche buyers.

Just look at games besides shooters in USA sold more on PS3 even if they were almost half of the X360 userbase. That should be enough proof to you that diversity were more important to PS fans than MS.

20% is doubtful but ok. I guess that explains why the PS3s biggest selling games are the same as the 360s lol. None of those niche games are no where to be found oddly except at the bottom.

If a game were on the TOP 10 wouldn't be niche, so you defeat your own argument.

Look at the difference on the top sellers to see how much more it sold on X1, then look at total SW sold and you'll see that PS fans bought more games that weren't top sellers.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 06 December 2015
Insidb said:
DonFerrari said:


Please explain sold like crap... because selling like crap for me is being very bellow expectations. Those games sold enough to generate sequels. Some games can be considered very sucessfull by their dev by selling 100k-250k while others need 6M. So you can't put selling like crap for all of them in the sale general ruler.

And yet you think all of them were bought by the same people... you can be sure that more than 20% of PS3 userbase were made of niche buyers.

Just look at games besides shooters in USA sold more on PS3 even if they were almost half of the X360 userbase. That should be enough proof to you that diversity were more important to PS fans than MS.

"Sold like crap" < 1.5M

Sales for major JRPGS' last mainline entries: MH-3.58, FFXIII-5.3, DQ:IX-5.8, NNK-1.46 (first entry), YK2-5.8, SO:LH-1.5, P0/A-9

I'll put the "greatest hits" definition for PS1, that started at over 150k sold... that is certainly a lot less than 1.5M so we can decide what is crap... maybe this guy think only 20 games a gen are worth anything and all the rest is garbage.

When Sony introduced the program for PlayStation in 1997, games could become Greatest Hits titles after selling at least 150,000 copies and being on the market for at least a year.[2] Minimum sales required eventually rose to 250,000.[3] When the program came to PlayStation 2 in 2002, games could become Greatest Hits titles after selling at least 400,000 copies and being on the market for at least 9 months

In 2006, Sony extended the Greatest Hits program to the PlayStation Portable.[5] To qualify, a title must be on the market for at least 9 months and have sold 250,000 copies or more. The Greatest Hits price for PlayStation Portable games typically begins at $19.99.

On July 28, 2008, the program was introduced on the PlayStation 3. A PlayStation 3 game must be on the market for 10 months and sell at least 500,000 copies to meet the Greatest Hits criteria. PlayStation 3 Greatest Hits titles currently sell at $29.99.

Since the PS4's release on November 15, 2013,[6] there have been four titles that have been named Greatest Hits for the PlayStation 4 with an as of yet unknown criteria for meeting the label.

 

So his criteria for crap is 3x bigger than Sony "Greatest Hits"... so anything that sells less than 10M must be very bad? He may not like any game on WiiU or X1 for the rest of the gen.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Carl on 06 December 2015
Nintyfan90 said:

Your proof they sold well?


I presented it to you in the first post. The fact that developers are keeping these niche titles on PS platforms and continuing franchises tells you that they sold well enough.

Souls, Ni no Kuni, Tales, Star Ocean, Idolmaster, Disgaea, Atelier, Valkyria Chronicles, Nier, Ace Combat, King of Fighters, Hyperdimention Neptunia, Persona, Ys, OneeChanbara and Yakuza are all examples of franchises that are considered niche and are being continued on the PS4 after successful stints on PS3 (and/or other platforms). I could name you many more, including new IP being risked on PS platforms that you wont see elsewhere.

If you have nothing more to do here than spread FUD and misinformation, I suggest you leave. The facts are against you.



                            

DonFerrari on 06 December 2015
Carl2291 said:
Nintyfan90 said:

Your proof they sold well?


I presented it to you in the first post. The fact that developers are keeping these niche titles on PS platforms and continuing franchises tells you that they sold well enough.

Souls, Ni no Kuni, Tales, Star Ocean, Idolmaster, Disgaea, Atelier, Valkyria Chronicles, Nier, Ace Combat, King of Fighters, Hyperdimention Neptunia, Persona, Ys, OneeChanbara and Yakuza are all examples of franchises that are considered niche and are being continued on the PS4 after successful stints on PS3 (and/or other platforms). I could name you many more, including new IP being risked on PS platforms that you wont see elsewhere.

If you have nothing more to do here than spread FUD and misinformation, I suggest you leave. The facts are against you.

You are giving him a lot more audience and proofs than he deserve, you have a far more stronger weapon for this kind of situation.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."