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

Forums - Gaming - Gran Turismo 5 > Halo 3 - Sales wise?

Gran Turismo isn't a household name (Why? because humans cannot identify with cars). Halo is, however Gran Turismo will push PS3 console sales for racer fans. Gran Turismo TV will also be a major attraction on PSN. Sony doesn't have a main character which gamers can identify as a household name, who isn't third party.

Gran Turismo won't outsell Halo on the basis of installed base activity.



Around the Network

This gen isn't over yet, when it is Halo 3 will have outsold GT1 & 4 and if it gets extensive bundling it'll beat 3.

So? yes Halo 3 will beat GT5 in sales.



 

CGI-Quality said:
gergroy said:
CGI-Quality said:

@ gergroy:
what logic do you speak of exactly? You said Halo 3 is where it is on a 30mill user base right? But when Halo 3 released, the 360 was NO WHERE NEAR that. Now you're trying to tell me that GT5, since we're using your user base argument (and by the time GT5 releases, the PS3 should be at at least 30mill WW), can't do 8-9mill on a 30mill user base but Halo 3 can? Yea, that kind of logic doesn't work, you're right.

so when did halo 3 get pulled off of the shelves?  I'm pretty sure it's still available to buy, if I'm not mistaken.  So, when we are talking life to date numbers, yes, I will use the current console numbers because believe it or not, people have bought 360's since halo 3 came out and yes, they bought halo 3.

so yes, I am telling you that halo 3 can do that and gran turismo can't.  Unlike gran turismo, the halo brand has proved that it can sell on a low user base (original xbox and halo 1 and 2).  Look at those numbers and just guess at how many copies of halo 1 or 2 would be sold if the original xbox had 140 million consoles sold.  Doesn't that make sense?  If you ad an extra 120 million people to the equation, don't you think at least 10% would want to get the most popular game for the system?  I actually think it would be more that 10%, but you get my point.  That would add another 12 million copies to those games sold.  The same sort of phenomenon is what bolstered the gran turismo's sells

However, lets agree to disagree.  I'm not going to convince you and you aren't going to convince me.  When the numbers come in though, I hope I will have to give you an "I told you so" message :)

 

Fixed. Once again, it's a prediction not a fact.

 

lol, very true, good fix

 



Carl2291 said:
damndl0ser said:
@Carl2291



LOL, is that the best argument you could come up with? M$ Money hats EVERYTHING!!!!!!!

Its called advertising and that is how you get your product out to the mass market. And THE reason everyone knows what Halo3 is. Any "Cultural Icon" you have now days is there because of advertising, and guess what someone had to pay for it.

I never said they moneyhatted anything.  That was pretty much the Jest of your argument.

I said they paid millions upon millions for the amount of advertising.  And GT5 wont?

And no, not everyone gets "cultural icon" status from paying for it.  Now days advertising is the biggest factor.

@pbroy, show me some killzone coke can? Like i highlighted.  KZ2 will never be a Cultural Icon so you wont see one.

 

Like my previous post stated, I own several of the GT games.  I love the series actually but it will never be as big as Halo is.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  I don't see any other racing games ever coming close to the popularity of the GT series this GEN.

 

 



"If you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow."

Quote by- The Imortal John Wayne, the original BADASS!

 

 

 

gergroy said:

Ok, I have bolded the areas of your argument that are faulty.  First of all, games like halo and gran turismo don't adhere to this 40% first week rule.  Halo 3 will probably end up selling at least 11 to 12 million and it sole 3 million the first week.  The big games out their keep selling as people buy into the system.  So as more people buy 360's, the number of halo 3's sold will keep going up.  Also, review scores can have an effect on game sales, ever heard of bioshock?  Game got perfect reviews, but when it hit stores it hit in small amounts because retailers weren't expecting a big demand for it.  I work at best buy and I remember there being an internal memo about how the unexpected review scores had increased demand and they were doing all they could to get more copies.  Also, look at too human, reviewed terribly, but it was one of those high anticpated exclusives but the sells didn't pan out because it got such terrible reviews. 

What surveys are you talking about, I have never heard of any.  I also remember there being a lot of talk of people being dissapointed with the game when it came out.  I think the lower review score speaks for itself here, you are just trying to throw your opinion in as fact.  Same with Majora's mask, I don't know a single person that likes majora's mask better than OoT.

FF7 and FFX never stopped selling, so they actually had the Same install bases as XII, or at least X does.  In fact, I can go into best buy right now and go buy FFX.  So it just boils down to which game is better.  Also X has benefited from quite a bit more years in the budget price range.

Thank you for making my point.  MGS3 had no advertising, which equates to lower sales.  Which makes your whole point of using them as examples moot.  Gran Turismo games have always been heavily marketed, which is one of the factors to their incredble sales, same with halo.

As far as the install base, I'm curious how you gather that the core audience actually decreases when the number of systems increases.  Do they all just throw their ps2's away when somebody else goes and buys a new system? 

Ok, the fact of the matter, by having a larger install base you are increasing the chances of growing the core audience.  Say 1 out of 10 gamers in america like FPS games.  Every 10th person that buys a 360 or ps3 grows that core audience.  New people that buy systems have game preferences just like everybody else.  What you are basically saying is after the first 15 million game systems sold, the number of games that sells will always stay the same, because install base doesn't matter.  So why do they even still sell the ps3?  Lets just get rid of the hardware because the games are where all the profit is anyway.  They are going to selling the same number of games anyway, so why sell new ps3's? 

Such a stupid argument. 

 

 

Halo 3 sold 4 million it's first week, according to VGChartz. It actually sold 4.5 million it's first week, VGChartz has 2 days cut off, they only tracked first 5 days, the rest of it's first week was carried over to "week 2". 4.5 million is around the 40% mark for 11 million. You should probably actually search things up.

 

Did a quick search, bunch of polls done, aparently around 30-40% in every poll agrees majoras was better. OoT was using the same formula, 2 worlds like from link to the past. It was basically a copy. It has a much more varried style of play, the story was unique unlike the tried and true story they always use.

 

Same install base? Wow, not touching that with a 50 foot pole.

 

MGS3 was widely accepted and was not critized. MGS2 was a ploy by kojima to get girls to start playing it. He even said it, he wanted a character "girls" would love. Raiden was born. MGS3 finally comes back, and unlike 2 which only had 1 enviroment, mgs3 had several, and the most detailed jungle "simulator" to date. It also had a 20 million dollar ad campaign.

 

Core audience does not change much, it constantly changes. This has been shown time and time again. We normally state "Early adopters" as core, but the fact is, people who buy a console within first 2 years are the core, per genre. Not getting into it though, search it up.

 

Also flawed. If 1 out of 10 people like FPS games, and the console is mainly for FPS, like the 360 is, then more people in the 10% will buy that console. Put it this way. Console deals with FPS games. Now say you have a possiblity to sell 1 million consoles, and knew exactly 10% of the audience loves FPS games. When big name FPS games come out, or the console, 50 thousand people from the 10% that loves FPS buys it, while only 150 thousand others buy it. Now there is still 800 thousand people left to buy it. Is it still 10% of that audience is into FPS? No, it decreased by half.

 

Core audiences adopt as early as possibly, however people we normally call "casuals" wait for price to come down etc the core buys it when it can, they don't wait. Over the years, core audience drops faster then it builds, though stays pretty steady, not that a core audience can't grow, it normally doesn't. Unlike you, I say, "usually" and "probably", meaning not an absolute.

 



Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Gran Turismo isn't a household name (Why? because humans cannot identify with cars). Halo is, however Gran Turismo will push PS3 console sales for racer fans. Gran Turismo TV will also be a major attraction on PSN. Sony doesn't have a main character which gamers can identify as a household name, who isn't third party.

Gran Turismo won't outsell Halo on the basis of installed base activity.

That's pretty subjective, AND far fetched. Kratos is widly known by gamers along with the newly acquired Sackboy. What about Ratchet and Clank, Jak & Daxter?....You get my point, they've got main, known characters just like every other company. They may not be as popular as say Mario or Master Chief, but they are there and known.

 

Kratos is known to gamers, but isn't a household name my friend. Household names can sell systems on their own. Kratos cannot sell a system. When we think of Action movies, the first name that comes to mind is Arnold Schwarzenegger. Rachet and Clank is a third party title. During the PSX era Crash Bandicoot was a household name. Even my Grandmother knew who Crash Bandicoot was....oh well...too bad Sony didn't stick with what worked.

Nintendo is the only company that has multiple household names which could sell consoles on their own.



@ damndl0ser
1. I never actually said moneyhatting, but i suppose it could have sounded like it.

2. Yes, GT5 will have lots of advertising... no it wont be at the level of Halo3.

3. Not necessarily, but i can see what you mean.

4. Right... MS payed for Master Chief to become as popular as he is... if SONY put as much money into KZ2 as MS did with Halo, in a couple of years we would be seeing Helghast as popular as anything else on the PS.



                            

Carl2291 said:
@ damndl0ser
1. I never actually said moneyhatting, but i suppose it could have sounded like it.

2. Yes, GT5 will have lots of advertising... no it wont be at the level of Halo3.

3. Not necessarily, but i can see what you mean.

4. Right... MS payed for Master Chief to become as popular as he is... if SONY put as much money into KZ2 as MS did with Halo, in a couple of years we would be seeing Helghast as popular as anything else on the PS.

 

M$ has something special with the Master Chief and I believe H3 would have sold 5million copies with absolutely no advertising whatsoever (word of mouth or whatever you want to call it).  But I guess you can say they "bought" his popularity if that makes you feel better.  

Sony has spent a lot of money on KZ2 advertising and while it wasn't as much as what was spent on H3 it was still a very large #.  I don't think KZ2 would have been even close in popularity to H3 even if they had the same kind of add campaign as H3.  It just doesn't have the fanbase that Halo does.

Sorry I helped make this thread get derailed,  im done with this mess.  :D



"If you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow."

Quote by- The Imortal John Wayne, the original BADASS!

 

 

 

Zuzic said:
gergroy said:
Zuzic said:
 

 

 

dude, your post is full of all sorts of fail.  first of all, I'm really sick of people bringing up the metal gear series as an indicator of how user base affects sales.  MGS3 had almost no marketing push, where metal gear solid 2 and 4 were highly marketed and pushed.  MGS3 is also the worse reviewed game of the series, metacritic of 91, where MGS2 is 96 and MGS4 is 94.  So your idea of MGS3 being highly regarded as the best in the series is laughable. 

Another issue with that argument is MGS4 was bundled with hardware, which nobody ever seems to think about when making this comparison.  I also love how you give LTD numbers of the game sold, but refer to it selling that number on the install base at the time.  Have people not bought ps3's since the game came out and also picked up that game? 

GT3 was bundled with the ps2 worlwide for over a year.  What do you think that might have done to the sales numbers of that game? 

As far as userbase affecting sales, think of it this way.  When you release a movie, you release it on dvd and blu ray.  Now, not as many have people have blu ray players, so the sells of that movie won't be as high on the blu ray side as the dvd side.  Now, imagine if you didn't release that movie on dvd at all, only blu ray.  Would that movie sell as much as it could if it was released on both?  No, because not as many people have access to blu ray players.  The same concept applies to video games.  Yes, there will be one or two exceptions to every rule but the idea that install base has nothing to do with sales is moronic at best.

 

 

40% of a games LTD is sold within the first week. A factor which is still current today, only thing changing that is things like WII fit. (Bundles don't count of course). 95% are sold within the first 2 months. Review scores do not equal sales, and surveys and general acceptance is MGS3 was the best. Personally I like 4 better, but whatever. MGS3 was far better then 2, review scores change per game. If you release a game, and it scores 95, I am 100% sure if you release a game which is the same it'll score lower. But why? Even if it's better it'll score lower.... But why...? People get used to it. MGS2 was groundbreaking, then MGS3 comes along, it did everything better but didn't have the impact.

 

Majoras Mask is a clear example of it. It is better then OoT(Though both are beaten by link to a past) but majoras is seen to be less of an impact. But why? OoT was the first jump to 3d, majoras mask just seemed less because of that.

 

People say goldeneye 64 is the best FPS of all time. Yet if you give it to someone who never played it before and started playing FPS now, they would probably say it's bad. Is it bad? Yes and no. Things age, and get worse with age as other games do things better, and even games that do it better may not be seen to be better in conparison.

 

FF is a good ideal. FF7 and 10 sold around the same. They both released on a console with not a large install base. FF12 and 10 have the same metacritic review, yet 12 sold 3 million less, on a much larger install base.

 

Install base means nothing. 2 things are what gets sales. Advertising, and core genre audience. No advertising, piss poor sales, no matter the game. Core genre audience refers to the actual number of people who enjoy said genre in that console userbase, and normally stays the same number throughout, in fact in most cases decreases, not increases.(People adopting or dropping). If you have 40 million people who have the console, yet only say 5 million actually like the RPG genre, if you sell 1 million, people would see that as only 2.5% buying the game. Is that fair to say, or is it fair to say 20% of people who are into those games bought it. Both are wrong, however it's something to thing about. Not that only people in that core audience are going to buy that type of game, but majority, around 90% comes from them, others are from people who want to try something new.

 

 

 

Really? 40% of a game LTD is sold in the first week? Then GT5:P should have sell only 1,6M? KZ2 won't sell more than 1,78M, LBP should be at 837k and MGS4 won't pass 4,5M LTD. 95% are sold within the first 2 months? Really? Then Halo 3 should be at 5.86M and SFIV (PS3) won't sell more than 50k for the rest of its lifetime. I won't argue about quality because it's more a matter of taste however.

Install base means nothing? If this is the case why games like MK Wii, Mario Party 8 or Super Mario Galaxy are selling all better than their last iteration in the GC era? Sure there are exceptions, but generally userbase is THE main factor.

Once again your post was full of all sorts of fails.

 



CGI-Quality said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Gran Turismo isn't a household name (Why? because humans cannot identify with cars). Halo is, however Gran Turismo will push PS3 console sales for racer fans. Gran Turismo TV will also be a major attraction on PSN. Sony doesn't have a main character which gamers can identify as a household name, who isn't third party.

Gran Turismo won't outsell Halo on the basis of installed base activity.

That's pretty subjective, AND far fetched. Kratos is widly known by gamers along with the newly acquired Sackboy. What about Ratchet and Clank, Jak & Daxter?....You get my point, they've got main, known characters just like every other company. They may not be as popular as say Mario or Master Chief, but they are there and known.

 

 

Who the hell are you talking about BTW?