One of the reasons the 360 won't win the console war...

The Wii is not being purchased by gamers, you may as well start comparing Ipod sales to XBOX sales since they both sell to the same crowd.Khansoul

I think you just insulted me...

We're gamers too. We play video games on a game system. We play them regularly. We pwn our friends at parties. We stay up late playing. Parents tell us it will melt our brains.

Gamers can be found on all systems, in any shape or size or age.

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

Um TVB

1- Look at the library of the system. Its library is more varied than that of the PS3 or Wii.
2- It has the most million sellers between the 3.
3- Does this mean MGS 4 is a shooter, because seriousaly not every game with a gun is a shooter. Mass Effect is an Rpg. and so are some of the other games. Sports games have done well, as well as racers, guiter hero, rock band. DMC 4 did great on the 360. GTA 4 on 360 outsold PS3 GTA 4. Lost Odyssey had a good run in sales, Viva Pinat sold 1 million copies. So did a game like Dead Rising. DOA 4 is a fighter, the list goes on.
4- Its not so much the 360s a shooter console, as much as Shooters have dominated this generation. They are the most talked about and hyped games on all platforms.

Going by your logic of shooting=shooter.

PS3
Resistance 2
Socom
Metal Gear Solid 4
Uncharted
Ratchet and Clank(shooting in it)
Warhawk
and ofcourse the multiplats it has with the 360 have and will do well on the platform.

The 360 won't win because of hardware and lack of worldwide appeal.

COme on TVB your better than this.

the-very-best

It's not my logic. I know that Mass Effect is not a shooter. I know that GTAIV isn't one. The OP is a casual's perspective, and since they make up the biggest market, that's why I think the 360 won't win, because it's being portrayed as a shooter console just like the Xbox was. Also a reason the PS3 is currently in 3rd place.

And yes, MGSIV would be a shooter which is why I didn't mention it in the OP, mentioning GT/FFXIII instead.

"The 360 won't win because of hardware and lack of worldwide appeal.... partly due to the console being portrayed as shooter console by the media and hence, casuals." That's my argument. I think I'm spot on but I'd like to read other opinions.

I get really peeved when people still call X360 a "shooter console". But it's even more unsual to see someone now brand both X360 AND PS3 as a shooter console :lol: Now some points I have to challenge on the very premesis of your argument;

* Just how have you ascertained the "casual's logic"? This is supposed to be based on how they view gaming, not us more dedicated gamers. Did you go around interviewing?

* You say casuals perceive the two systems as a shooter console, but they aren't the ones browsing message boards and reviews online, getting the latest news of upcoming games. They are the drop-into-the-store shoppers who browse the shelves, not game news sites. Wouldn't they just take a look at the shelf, and see the varied titles; like DOA 4, Forza 2, PGR 4, Banjoe Threeie, NG2, DMC4, SoulCalibur 4, AC 6, VF 5, Lost Odyssey, Eternal Sonata, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, Formula 1, GT5P, (not to mention the plethora of sports titles)... and from that observation draw the simple conclusion "there sure are alot of different games to choose from" rather than "hmmm, look at all the shooters there are here"??

* Don't casuals enjoy shooters as much as dedicated gamers? Isn't the Halo series popular, which many consider a casual demographic shooter game? Is having lots of shooters really that detrimental to sales, as long as there's still genre variety, which can easily be seen on the shelves when shopping? (established above)

XBOX 360 is the new default system the way PS2 was. Khansoul

One question TC where did you get your list of million+ sellers? I looked at VG Charts ( I know crappy source) but they have 41 million+ seller games for the 360 for worldwide. So I think if you really want to make a list you should put every game and not just 28 out of 41 games.Eltroz

I got them from Wiki and checked most of the sources before posting (Gamespot, IGN, Gamingbiz etc), and many are a few months old so the list is probably bigger, but I'm not gonna use VGChartz because the whole thread would just be replies of ":lol: VGCharts".

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="elpoep"]

I've always, ALWAYS said that the-very-best either works for Sony or works for a company hired by Sony.elpoep

Now you're just being silly. TVB's just a smart guy who likes Sony - if he figured out how to get them to write him a cheque for writing *forum posts* then good for him.

Well, Silly Billy-- several aritcles have been written about the types of guerilla marketing that happens on these forums and well-- the-very-best is a prime example. Sony particularly has been known for these types of shennigans.

See: alliwantisapspforxmas.com

Its hard to justify that someone is simply a "smart fellow" that's overly dedicated, shows up as if they have a schedule and takes Sundays off! The guy is a corporate shill and usually has the same people replying to his posts to "back up" his opinions-- which just makes me conclude that these shills work in teams.

I do work for Sony.

[QUOTE="the-very-best"]

It's just million sellers. I didn't count anything below that because those games probably didn't warrant any attention from casuals, and casuals are the focus of my argument.SUD123456

This is where I must punish you to make a point....a point that dang near everyone has wrong. It is simple really.

Pick your top 10 franchises from the PS2 and examine their sales. Take the best selling versions of those franchises and add them together. Ask yourself whether anyone bought, 1 or 2, or 3 or any combination of those games. Compare the total to the PS2 install base.

Half yes half as in 50% or more of PS2 owners did not buy ANY, as in not one, as in definately not 2, as in notta, zip, zero, zilch of the top 10 franchises. Any reasonable look at the numbers demonstrates this.

Because the real strength of the PS2 was the sheer number and diversity of games. Something for everyone. It was the games NOT selling 1 million+ which led to the huge PS2 install base.

This is the real issue MS is facing. It isn't Viva Pinata selling a lot. Or Viva Pinata 2 selling more. It is whether they can bring 250 Viva Pinata type games to the market.

I'm confused - Are you agreeing or disagreeing with the OP? Either way, I agree with your points... but if there's no demand for games like VP, then MS isn't going to make them. They're only going to make a couple to subdue any criticisms that the 360 is a 100% shooter console, despite the reality that they know the games won't be commercially successful. That fault is largely due to gamers themselves.

3rd party publishers are already getting millions of shooters so why would they need to try anything else? The problem of 360 not getting an expansion in the userbase is not theirs.

[QUOTE="Khansoul"]The Wii is not being purchased by gamers, you may as well start comparing Ipod sales to XBOX sales since they both sell to the same crowd.TAKE_IT_BACK

I think you just insulted me...

We're gamers too. We play video games on a game system. We play them regularly. We pwn our friends at parties. We stay up late playing. Parents tell us it will melt our brains.

Gamers can be found on all systems, in any shape or size or age.

I will say that I have been loving my Wii alot since my purchase of Boom Blox, but I'll be darned if my arm doesn't feel like its going to fall off.

[QUOTE="elpoep"][QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="elpoep"]

I've always, ALWAYS said that the-very-best either works for Sony or works for a company hired by Sony.the-very-best

Now you're just being silly. TVB's just a smart guy who likes Sony - if he figured out how to get them to write him a cheque for writing *forum posts* then good for him.

Well, Silly Billy-- several aritcles have been written about the types of guerilla marketing that happens on these forums and well-- the-very-best is a prime example. Sony particularly has been known for these types of shennigans.

See: alliwantisapspforxmas.com

Its hard to justify that someone is simply a "smart fellow" that's overly dedicated, shows up as if they have a schedule and takes Sundays off! The guy is a corporate shill and usually has the same people replying to his posts to "back up" his opinions-- which just makes me conclude that these shills work in teams.

I do work for Sony.

[QUOTE="the-very-best"]

It's just million sellers. I didn't count anything below that because those games probably didn't warrant any attention from casuals, and casuals are the focus of my argument.SUD123456

This is where I must punish you to make a point....a point that dang near everyone has wrong. It is simple really.

Pick your top 10 franchises from the PS2 and examine their sales. Take the best selling versions of those franchises and add them together. Ask yourself whether anyone bought, 1 or 2, or 3 or any combination of those games. Compare the total to the PS2 install base.

Half yes half as in 50% or more of PS2 owners did not buy ANY, as in not one, as in definately not 2, as in notta, zip, zero, zilch of the top 10 franchises. Any reasonable look at the numbers demonstrates this.

Because the real strength of the PS2 was the sheer number and diversity of games. Something for everyone. It was the games NOT selling 1 million+ which led to the huge PS2 install base.

This is the real issue MS is facing. It isn't Viva Pinata selling a lot. Or Viva Pinata 2 selling more. It is whether they can bring 250 Viva Pinata type games to the market.

I'm confused - Are you agreeing or disagreeing with the OP? Either way, I agree with your points... but if there's no demand for games like VP, then MS isn't going to make them. They're only going to make a couple to subdue any criticisms that the 360 is a 100% shooter console, despite the reality that they know the games won't be commercially successful. That fault is largely due to gamers themselves.

3rd party publishers are already getting millions of shooters so why would they need to try anything else? The problem of 360 not getting an expansion in the userbase is not theirs.

And if I recall correctly, I remember which branch/type of work you do for them. Amazing job that I wish I had ATM.

I get really peeved when people still call X360 a "shooter console". But it's even more unsual to see someone now brand both X360 AND PS3 as a shooter console :lol: Now some points I have to challenge on the very premesis of your argument;

* Just how have you ascertained the "casual's logic"? This is supposed to be based on how they view gaming, not us more dedicated gamers. Did you go around interviewing?

* You say casuals perceive the two systems as a shooter console, but they aren't the ones browsing message boards and reviews online, getting the latest news of upcoming games. They are the drop-into-the-store shoppers who browse the shelves, not game news sites. Wouldn't they just take a look at the shelf, and see the varied titles; like DOA 4, Forza 2, PGR 4, Banjoe Threeie, NG2, DMC4, SoulCalibur 4, AC 6, VF 5, Lost Odyssey, Eternal Sonata, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, Formula 1, GT5P, (not to mention the plethora of sports titles)... and from that observation draw the simple conclusion "there sure are alot of different games to choose from" rather than "hmmm, look at all the shooters there are here"??

* Don't casuals enjoy shooters as much as dedicated gamers? Isn't the Halo series popular, which many consider a casual demographic shooter game? Is having lots of shooters really that detrimental to sales, as long as there's still genre variety, which can easily be seen on the shelves when shopping? (established above)

AdobeArtist

I know many casual and non-gamers, and they don't view any system as anything on assumptions. In my experience, they usually think all the systems are more or less one system.

They (In my experience) see games that interest them, and look to get those games. They usually don't analyse games that don't look interesting to them.

My girlfriend is a great example. She never says "That looks like a shooter console." She says things like "That game looks good. Can we play it, and is it any good?"

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

I get really peeved when people still call X360 a "shooter console". But it's even more unsual to see someone now brand both X360 AND PS3 as a shooter console :lol: Now some points I have to challenge on the very premesis of your argument;

* Just how have you ascertained the "casual's logic"? This is supposed to be based on how they view gaming, not us more dedicated gamers. Did you go around interviewing?

* You say casuals perceive the two systems as a shooter console, but they aren't the ones browsing message boards and reviews online, getting the latest news of upcoming games. They are the drop-into-the-store shoppers who browse the shelves, not game news sites. Wouldn't they just take a look at the shelf, and see the varied titles; like DOA 4, Forza 2, PGR 4, Banjoe Threeie, NG2, DMC4, SoulCalibur 4, AC 6, VF 5, Lost Odyssey, Eternal Sonata, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, Formula 1, GT5P, (not to mention the plethora of sports titles)... and from that observation draw the simple conclusion "there sure are alot of different games to choose from" rather than "hmmm, look at all the shooters there are here"??

* Don't casuals enjoy shooters as much as dedicated gamers? Isn't the Halo series popular, which many consider a casual demographic shooter game? Is having lots of shooters really that detrimental to sales, as long as there's still genre variety, which can easily be seen on the shelves when shopping? (established above)

SpruceCaboose

I know many casual and non-gamers, and they don't view any system as anything on assumptions. In my experience, they usually think all the systems are more or less one system.

They (In my experience) see games that interest them, and look to get those games. They usually don't analyse games that don't look interesting to them.

My girlfriend is a great example. She never says "That looks like a shooter console." She says things like "That game looks good. Can we play it, and is it any good?"

That's what I thought. Preconceptions are found only in dedicated gamers where fanboyism can take root, and it does so because we actually care about this hobby. But among casuals, for which this is (as the name implies) a casual pursuit, they just see games as games and don't label the systems. In short, they'll see ALL the games on the shelf and simply pick out what they like without bias.

And wait... you have a girlfriend who plays video games with you? :shock: You LUCKY *bleeeeeep* :P :P

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]

I know many casual and non-gamers, and they don't view any system as anything on assumptions. In my experience, they usually think all the systems are more or less one system.

They (In my experience) see games that interest them, and look to get those games. They usually don't analyse games that don't look interesting to them.

My girlfriend is a great example. She never says "That looks like a shooter console." She says things like "That game looks good. Can we play it, and is it any good?"

AdobeArtist

That's what I thought. Preconceptions are found only in dedicated gamers where fanboyism can take root, and it does so because we actually care about this hobby. But among casuals, for which this is (as the name implies) a casual pursuit, they just see games as games and don't label the systems. In short, they'll see ALL the games on the shelf and simply pick out what they like without bias.

And wait... you have a girlfriend who plays video games with you? :shock: You LUCKY *bleeeeeep* :P :P

I realize that I spelled analyse with the EU s instead of the US z, and it looks really weird to me!

Anywho, on topic, she is still at best a casual gamer, but I am working on it.

Step 1 was the Wii and Wii Sports for "parties".

Step 2, I got her a DS and Brain Age. Brain Age became Cooking Mama, and now she is into Elite Beat Agents.

Step 3, Ratchet & Clank Future , Rock Band and Guitar Hero 2/3.

Lastly, I have gotten her a gamer tag of her own, and she battles people in GH on Live, and she even started (without me knowing) her own game of GTA IV. She isn't far, but she likes driving around and crashing into things. She also gets a kick out of Boom Blox and has been eying my PSP.

Eventually, she will be my co-op partner in Gears of War 4 or play against me in Resistance 3, but that is a ways off still.

We were all casual gamers at some point. I am just trying to turn her passing interest into at least a stronger interest in gaming.

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]

I know many casual and non-gamers, and they don't view any system as anything on assumptions. In my experience, they usually think all the systems are more or less one system.

They (In my experience) see games that interest them, and look to get those games. They usually don't analyse games that don't look interesting to them.

My girlfriend is a great example. She never says "That looks like a shooter console." She says things like "That game looks good. Can we play it, and is it any good?"

SpruceCaboose

That's what I thought. Preconceptions are found only in dedicated gamers where fanboyism can take root, and it does so because we actually care about this hobby. But among casuals, for which this is (as the name implies) a casual pursuit, they just see games as games and don't label the systems. In short, they'll see ALL the games on the shelf and simply pick out what they like without bias.

And wait... you have a girlfriend who plays video games with you? :shock: You LUCKY *bleeeeeep* :P :P

I realize that I spelled analyse with the EU s instead of the US z, and it looks really weird to me!

Anywho, on topic, she is still at best a casual gamer, but I am working on it.

Step 1 was the Wii and Wii Sports for "parties".

Step 2, I got her a DS and Brain Age. Brain Age became Cooking Mama, and now she is into Elite Beat Agents.

Step 3, Ratchet & Clank Future , Rock Band and Guitar Hero 2/3.

Lastly, I have gotten her a gamer tag of her own, and she battles people in GH on Live, and she even started (without me knowing) her own game of GTA IV. She isn't far, but she likes driving around and crashing into things. She also gets a kick out of Boom Blox and has been eying my PSP.

Eventually, she will be my co-op partner in Gears of War 4 or play against me in Resistance 3, but that is a ways off still.

We were all casual gamers at some point. I am just trying to turn her passing interest into at least a stronger interest in gaming.

hmmm.... building it in stages. Very clever. Maybe you can implement some Pavlovian techniques on top of that. Give her some yummy chocolates every time she's playing games with you ;)

hmmm.... building it in stages. Very clever. Maybe you can implement some Pavlovian techniques on top of that. Give her some yummy chocolates every time she's playing games with you ;)

AdobeArtist

It would be all well and good until she found my log books, then all hell would break loose, probably along with my precious electronics. :D

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

hmmm.... building it in stages. Very clever. Maybe you can implement some Pavlovian techniques on top of that. Give her some yummy chocolates every time she's playing games with you ;)

SpruceCaboose

It would be all well and good until she found my log books, then all hell would break loose, probably along with my precious electronics. :D

:lol::lol: Don't you know what safes are for, friend-o? :P :P

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

hmmm.... building it in stages. Very clever. Maybe you can implement some Pavlovian techniques on top of that. Give her some yummy chocolates every time she's playing games with you ;)

AdobeArtist

It would be all well and good until she found my log books, then all hell would break loose, probably along with my precious electronics. :D

:lol::lol: Don't you know what safes are for, friend-o? :P :P

We have no locks. Breeds distrust, and besides, its not like we have anything of value that could fit in a safe! Outside the electronics, we are average working stiffs making enough to pay the bills, at least until I finish school.

[QUOTE="SUD123456"][QUOTE="the-very-best"]

It's just million sellers. I didn't count anything below that because those games probably didn't warrant any attention from casuals, and casuals are the focus of my argument.the-very-best

This is where I must punish you to make a point....a point that dang near everyone has wrong. It is simple really.

Pick your top 10 franchises from the PS2 and examine their sales. Take the best selling versions of those franchises and add them together. Ask yourself whether anyone bought, 1 or 2, or 3 or any combination of those games. Compare the total to the PS2 install base.

Half yes half as in 50% or more of PS2 owners did not buy ANY, as in not one, as in definately not 2, as in notta, zip, zero, zilch of the top 10 franchises. Any reasonable look at the numbers demonstrates this.

Because the real strength of the PS2 was the sheer number and diversity of games. Something for everyone. It was the games NOT selling 1 million+ which led to the huge PS2 install base.

This is the real issue MS is facing. It isn't Viva Pinata selling a lot. Or Viva Pinata 2 selling more. It is whether they can bring 250 Viva Pinata type games to the market.

I'm confused - Are you agreeing or disagreeing with the OP? Either way, I agree with your points... but if there's no demand for games like VP, then MS isn't going to make them. They're only going to make a couple to subdue any criticisms that the 360 is a 100% shooter console, despite the reality that they know the games won't be commercially successful. That fault is largely due to gamers themselves.

3rd party publishers are already getting millions of shooters so why would they need to try anything else? The problem of 360 not getting an expansion in the userbase is not theirs.

I am disagreeing with the OP...strongly. I agree that MS has a challenge. I disagree entirely with your OP about the nature of the challenge and the nature of the solution.

To win the war you need variety and lots of it. Yes you need some hits, but a few hits e.g. million + sellers is not what wins the war. A ton of lesser but decent games in all genres wins the war. One only needs to look at the huge number of games of the PS1 and PS2 that scored average and sold less than a million. That is the glue in between the main franchises. It is easily demonstrable that a large % of Sony buyers in previous generations did not buy any of the big hits, none, zero, nilch, nada. But they must have bought something, no?

Now to some degree it is a chicken and egg. You need some hits and sales success of some franchises in order to attract more of the average games in all genres. And you need a big enough install base that developers simply need to access a small % of that install base to be reasonably successful.

However, all of this needs to be placed in the context of probability of profit...which is function of development cost vs sales success.

The Wii is in the best position because you can develop cheaply and the install base is the largest and the distribution of consumers is probably broadest. Ergo highest probability of success for average dvelopers with average games.

The 360 is in the mid-position because the development is easier than the PS3 using normal practices...ergo cheaper. It has a decent sized install base, but a very attractive attach rate. The issue you are asking is about the distribution of 360 owners. Your evidence is top sellers...and you lump anything that has a gun in it into a fake category of shooters. Only half the games you list are not shooters and the developers of those games do not view the games as shooters. I have an issue with that.

However, my bigger issue is that you are examining the wrong data. 3rd party developers are not all morons. While I am sure many hope their games are blockbusters, the business fundamentals are not about blockbusters. Every game cannot be a blockbuster and if everyone ran their companies as if every game had to be...the industry would fail. Most games are developed with smaller development treams, over less time, with a more modest budget and lower expectations of sales. The benchmark for those games is not million + sellers.

Meaning, virtually every word of your OP is wrong IMO. It isn't your list of supposed shooters that matters. It is tier two sales results that matter as that is what attracts or doesn't the mid tier games/developers. And in that, there are quite a few good 360 successes. More so for instance than the PS3 which has had innumerable dismal results in what should be decent tier two games....and at higher development costs. Problematic for Sony and IMO a horrid business strategy with their HW for this generation.

In any case, the Wii is unstoppable and MS and Sony are battling for last. While I have my doubts about MS ability to broaden its base by huge amounts, I don't think it is because of their top sellers. I think it is simply they lack scale in first and 2nd party games/developers and they won't easily over come Nintendo or Sony on that front...they just can't push out the sheer volume of games that the others can. Still I'd rather be MS than Sony, because all fanboy BS aside...MS is going to grow their share somewhere between moderately and significantly while Sony is suffering one of the worst product share meltdowns in recent memory. And Nintendo...money making gods in the short term.

Perhaps the 360 is a little- A LITTLE- shooter-centric, but in my citation-less opinion, a large demand for shooters exists in North America. The other main demand is for driving games. Easterners are more into RPGs and RTSs.

I realise this is a gross oversimplification, and that some of you live in NA and play RPGs, but this is simply what i feel to be true.

XBOX 360 is the new default system the way PS2 was. The only thing you showed was why PS3 will not win this gen. The multiplats are all superior on XBOX 360 if not for XBOX LIve alone.Khansoul

JAJAJAJAJAJAJA yeah sure and the pigs fly

360 will be last period. worst selling console since all hit market and the trend continuesMandingo101

This thread's not meant to offend although I'm sure it will because apparently saying a console probably won't the console war in SW is equivalent to getting kicked in the balls.

Anyhoo, the following list is a list of games that have sold over 1 million for the 360. The titles in bold are shooters. The titles underlined are action or RPG games with shooter elements. You see where I'm going with this? Yeah, you do, and so does everyone else, so don't think you're clever:

• Halo 3
• Gears of War
• Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
• Grand Theft Auto IV
• Forza Motorsport 2
• Marvel: Ultimate Alliance
• BioShock
• Guitar Hero II
• Assassin's Creed
• Madden NFL 07
• Mass Effect
• The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
• Madden NFL 08
• Crackdown
• Perfect Dark Zero
• Lost Planet: Extreme Condition
• Call of Duty 2
• Dead Rising
• Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock
• Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas
• Call of Duty 3
• Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
• Fight Night Round 3
• Dead or Alive 4
• The Orange Box
• Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2
• Uno
• Saints Row

From a casual perspective and I really stress that, the 360 is still a console for shooters. The games that get the most attention from the gaming community are shooters, as are the games that get the most attention from the media, hence the reason why a lot of casuals still think it's a console for shooters. And since casuals are the biggest consumers, this is one of the reasons I(me, personally, in my opinion) think that the 360 won't win the console war.

MS doesn't promote its variety very well simply because you guys don't buy them. People complain that the industry is lacking innovation... which is funny since all you do is buy very similar games, so why would the devs need to innovate?

The Wii and PS3 million sellers are more varied, and I think PS3 is also having the same problem now that the 360 is having with casuals also seeing the console as a shooter console primarily, hence one reason for it being in 3rd place. I think having established franchises like GT and FF will push it ahead quickly, but we'll see.

Anyway, just thought I might throw this out there to discuss if any of the points I brought up are interesting to anyone here. What do you guys think?

the-very-best

Well how does PS3 have the more varied and casual exclusives? If anything the Wii is the casual consumers console of choice.