When did I claim I was continuing? I just stated there was more than one small issue that made me and others upset.

Claiming we're doing something we aren't just looks like trolling. Not that you aren't agreeing with us, but that you are twisting our statements and putting us down. That is not what a mod should do. 

BTW, I started a thread to give constructive criticism about this. 

FYI, that flailing comment wasn't geared toward you, Lord. Last post. I swear.

*dashes off*

if it wont be a core game an its on wii then i think it will bomb

 Well I'll reply now and maybe you'll see it later.

First are you saying Ubisoft are lumping everything "casual" together and will claim their sales suck compared to other games in the same "genre", or are you personally saying Rabbids 2 was a failure sale wise because of the same reason.

If it's the former, then I could see them doing that, if it's the later then I don't think that's an entirely fair argument. First I don't think it's fair to compare Rabbids 2 to Guitar Hero. Just lumping together as casual seems like a cop-out, especially considering Guitar Hero III is absurdly difficult on Expert. But ignoring that even, they're different genres. Rabbids is a mini-game collection and Guitar Hero is a Rhythm game.

Past that, Guitar Hero III is the fourth (Rock the 80's would be the third =P) in the series and the first on the Wii, and Mario Party 8 was the eighth or up in the series, also first on the Wii. They were both latest versions In now long running series and the first of the series on the Wii. So I'd except them both to greatly outsell RRR2.

I also expect Mario Party 9 will sell less than 8 because looking at the trend with the previous Mario Parties, they always less than the less except when on a debuting on a new system. Probably because they're usually the same as the last except when being made for a new system creates a sense of newness, regardless if anything was changed or not. RRR2 seemed to fall victim to that, and wasn't helped by the notion it sounds like the changes that were made were generally unfavorable.

If you were just trying to argue Ubisoft themselves were disappointed in the RRR2's sales, I'd agree with you. But it seems like they deserve some of the blame. From the looks of things they put lack luster title that both paled in comparison to the original, and did little to expand or change from it's formula. That's why I didn't buy it. I liked the first one, but when I saw the most people felt it was largely the same as the first, but NOT as good, I shied away from it. That is just me, but they were probably others with similar sentiment.

I don't agree it's a good example that you can't establish or sell established franchises on the Wii outside of Nintendo's own. 

Example, the idea of making a (party) game is to attract as wide an audience as possible, the only thing like you mentioned that should or could stop the growth of a party game is lack of change in what you playing between versions.

You’re also comparing past Mario Party's and claiming the trend but neglect the difference in install base growth between GC and Wii. Also this time around the Wii has three very unique interfaces, two of which can be using in multiple ways, not sure about the balance board.

With a growth this rapid, there is no reason why a game as successful as RRR didn't attract the newcomers unless it wasn't marketed - which it was. Unless the game did attract newcomers but the potential incumbents knew what to expect and didn't want it, the anticipated value wasn't there.

ENOUGH OF THIS!!!

You will buy your Hamsterz and Babiez, you will play them, and you will enjoy it!
Now to bed with you all...  no dinner for you!

 I should have been clear that the Mario Party example extends back into the N64. Mario Party 2 sold less than one, and three less than two. Four came out on the cube and ended up outselling three despite a smaller install base and legs possibly being cut short by the three follow up games. (All of which sold less than the previous version) Unless Mario Party 9 does something to mix things up I'd except it to sell less than 8.

There's no one reason why RRR2 underperformed, there's several. 

First, you're still dodging the issue of quality. I know quality is entirely subjective and doesn't represent sales, but it's reasonable to think a sequel not being as good as the original may deter it sales. Devil May Cry 2 sold a million less than the first one, despite the ever growing PS2 install base. I'd imagine it being poorly received in comparison with the first had a lot to do with that. The more mainstream audience may not read game reviews, but I'd imagine they'd listen to their friends. Bad word of mouth may of hurt it sales if it was largely considered less than the first game.

As for marketing, it was indeed marketed, but how well? For the internet I remember they had a lot of cute videos that generated a fair amount of interest and that was largely cut short by the lack luster reviews. In the mainstream I don't personally know how much was spent when and where, all I can recall some decent buy forgettable TV commercials. But I don't the full scope of their ad campaign so I can't entirely judge.

Marketing is more then just spending money on air-time and print. You have to present something catchy or compelling and to the right audience, and often the right time as well. Microsoft spent a lot of money promoting Viva Pinata, but it sold relatively poorly anyways, despite favorable reviews. Part of the problem may have simply been the 360's userbase isn't very responsive to these kinds of games, but I think a larger part was HOW it was marketed. I remember they had Burger King toys, it was on cereal boxes, and some lousy 4KIDS show was made for it. They were concentrating on just stereotypical children's appeal and very little else. They wasn't very much mainstream advertising that focused it on being a game, let a long a good one. People probably thought the game may have been a cash in for the show since the show was released first. They spent so much time and money on highlighting it being color and kid friendly they forgot to market it as a video game as well or anything with substance beyond that.

Further more, advertising can only carry something so far. Capcom allegedly spent around 20 Million to advertise Lost Planet, as much as it cost to make it. They ran tons of commercials and had virtually no competition in January when it released and burned up the charts for that month. Today they've sold about a million and a half units on the 360. That certainly isn't bad, but underwhelming if they spent so much to promote it. Ultimately a large part of it selling what it did was it being a forgettable title released after the spend crazy Christmas season. The advertising surely helped to sell what it did, but it can't change what it is.

You already said why RRR2 didn't sell as much as it could, the target audience didn't see the value in it. It was released in Christmas and had to compete with the likes of Guitar Hero III, Mario Galaxy, and even Mario and Sonic Olympics which had a more aggressive and effective marketing campaign. It didn't stand out, nor did it advertisements in the wave of Christmas releases, and little good word of mouth likely cut it legs smaller than they may of been.

Lastly it sales aren't bad at all. Maybe you or Ubisoft were expecting a runaway success, considering all it's had against it's still selling well. If you look at the regional break down RRR2 has already outsold the original in the PAL region by almost 200k. And it looking at the latest software charts it still sells almost 15k in the US a week, and another 15k in Europe. So it'll probably will surpass the original in sales and keep going. Very few Wii games in general are top heavy and sell decently over long periods of time. It would appear a good portion of the Wii's extended audience aren't concerned with how new a title is and just pick up games over time.

I didn't say it's sales were bad, well I did but I gave a direct comparison, which was RRR, my point is on the Mario Party issue had nothing to do with quality but with what you brought up which was the unique elements of each of the subsequent mario parties for that platform. I'd say that a person buys each Zelda knowing it's going to be a Zelda - However TP is on route to out sell OoT, I believe this is the effect of a fast growing install base, that will of course become larger than N64 by some time next year.

In that logic I conclude that RRR2 underperformed when you relate it to RRR, both came out during hectic seasons, one at launch the other at christmas, the difference is that the install base was much larger at RRR2's inning. Clearly somethin went wrong, the game failed to do what a party game is supposed to do, which is attract everyone.

Of course that's impossible, but the difference can be seen in games like Mario and Sonic at the Olympics, Mario Party, Wario Ware, and to a lesser extent even Carnival Games.

3 of those are new IP's.

There is no denying it is one of the best sellers on the Wii, but given that the name is known now, it should of seen at least some growth over it's predecessor.

I love Ubisoft. They have a vision and passion for games, dedicating most of their resources for developing game-versions they'd want to play themselves.