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

Forums - Sales - A possible reason 3rd parties ignore the Wii...

MaxwellGT2000 on 20 May 2009
Esa-Petteri said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

I guess you think it would have sold that much without mario? :)

 

 

I believe you missed the discussion which was the game third party and deserves to be included into the OP, try to troll somewhere else...



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

Around the Network
Esa-Petteri on 20 May 2009
MaxwellGT2000 said:
Esa-Petteri said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

I guess you think it would have sold that much without mario? :)

 

 

I believe you missed the discussion which was the game third party and deserves to be included into the OP, try to troll somewhere else...

Oh sorry, I was not aware that you get butthurt so easily. Maybe you should stop flaming by calling people trolls.

 



MaxwellGT2000 on 20 May 2009
Esa-Petteri said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
Esa-Petteri said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

I guess you think it would have sold that much without mario? :)

 

 

I believe you missed the discussion which was the game third party and deserves to be included into the OP, try to troll somewhere else...

Oh sorry, I was not aware that you get butthurt so easily. Maybe you should stop flaming by calling people trolls.

 

 

No I was just informing you went off topic and away from the discussion at hand.  And since when is calling you out "flaming" *amazes me*...



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

mjc2021 on 20 May 2009
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

 

As for the rest of your post, visuals does not mean how much technology goes into it, something on the SEGA Gen can be more visually pleasing to the eye then some of the games now...  As for the games you listed they're noteworthy for their gameplay, their visuals look generic HD games...


Uhhh... probably because Mario games are known for having outstanding sales. While Sega games tend to have mediocre sales. Must you disagree with everything?

I quote... "The engine has yet to put out a real visually satisfying game outside of Gears and UT3." You only mentioned graphics so I responded only mentioning graphics.



Esa-Petteri on 20 May 2009
MaxwellGT2000 said:
Esa-Petteri said:

Oh sorry, I was not aware that you get butthurt so easily. Maybe you should stop flaming by calling people trolls.

 

 

No I was just informing you went off topic and away from the discussion at hand.  And since when is calling you out "flaming" *amazes me*...

 

Sure dude. I would "call you out" too, but it would only get me banned.



Around the Network
MaxwellGT2000 on 20 May 2009
mjc2021 said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

 

As for the rest of your post, visuals does not mean how much technology goes into it, something on the SEGA Gen can be more visually pleasing to the eye then some of the games now...  As for the games you listed they're noteworthy for their gameplay, their visuals look generic HD games...

 

Uhhh... probably because Mario games are known for having outstanding sales. While Sega games tend to have mediocre sales. Must you disagree with everything?

I quote... "The engine has yet to put out a real visually satisfying game outside of Gears and UT3." You only mentioned graphics so I responded only mentioning graphics.

 

Visually satisfying is the key terms there, 2D games are visually satisfying, Bioshock was noteworthy cause it had good gameplay and story, Mirrors Edge had good gameplay, again I've yet to see anything visually pleasing come from the engine outside of Epics own games..



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

mjc2021 on 20 May 2009
MaxwellGT2000 said:
Esa-Petteri said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

I guess you think it would have sold that much without mario? :)

 

 

I believe you missed the discussion which was the game third party and deserves to be included into the OP, try to troll somewhere else...


His response was relevant. Do you really think the game would have been as successful without an incredibly popular franchise?

mjc2021 on 20 May 2009
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

 

As for the rest of your post, visuals does not mean how much technology goes into it, something on the SEGA Gen can be more visually pleasing to the eye then some of the games now...  As for the games you listed they're noteworthy for their gameplay, their visuals look generic HD games...

 

Uhhh... probably because Mario games are known for having outstanding sales. While Sega games tend to have mediocre sales. Must you disagree with everything?

I quote... "The engine has yet to put out a real visually satisfying game outside of Gears and UT3." You only mentioned graphics so I responded only mentioning graphics.

 

Visually satisfying is the key terms there, 2D games are visually satisfying, Bioshock was noteworthy cause it had good gameplay and story, Mirrors Edge had good gameplay, again I've yet to see anything visually pleasing come from the engine outside of Epics own games..


I get what you're saying, but I think those games look great.

MaxwellGT2000 on 20 May 2009
mjc2021 said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
Esa-Petteri said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

I guess you think it would have sold that much without mario? :)

 

 

I believe you missed the discussion which was the game third party and deserves to be included into the OP, try to troll somewhere else...

 

His response was relevant. Do you really think the game would have been as successful without an incredibly popular franchise?

 

Sonic games still sell in the millions, so it's not like it sells on Mario's name alone as you guys act, alone with Mario it probably wouldn't have sold as much, alone with Sonic is the same result, being the first game to include both icons was a big point but still doesn't mean it's sales dont matter.



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

mjc2021 on 20 May 2009
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
Esa-Petteri said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
mjc2021 said:
@ MaxwellGT2000
And I was pointing out why that game in particular shouldn't be included. Either way people bought it because it has a Nintendo franchise. I don't think it should be included, you disagree. Lets leave it to that.

 

 How do you know this, did you interview each and every person that bought it, did you take a survey?  Do you have any proof at all??? Didn't think so...

I guess you think it would have sold that much without mario? :)

 

 

I believe you missed the discussion which was the game third party and deserves to be included into the OP, try to troll somewhere else...

 

His response was relevant. Do you really think the game would have been as successful without an incredibly popular franchise?

 

Sonic games still sell in the millions, so it's not like it sells on Mario's name alone as you guys act, alone with Mario it probably wouldn't have sold as much, alone with Sonic is the same result, being the first game to include both icons was a big point but still doesn't mean it's sales dont matter.


Yeah, in the millions with combined sales of multiple consoles.

Sonic & Mario combined gave better sales. But Sonic alone would sell much less than Mario alone.