Sales Do Matter. Isn't It Obvious?

Sales have mattered in every generation so far. However, now that the Wii is winning, no one cares for them anymore it seems. Why is that so? Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase? They would certainly reach more people that way which increases the chances of their games selling more. Furthermore, the PS2 did get trash games as well, but they also had a few gems here and there.

Yes, we are gamers and we care about games. Nevertheless, the link between sales and games is apparent undeniable. The more games there are, the higher the chances that one of them will be a good game. The PS1 and the PS2 are perfect examples of this. I do not understand why we suddenly exclude sales. People comment with silly remarks such as "I have no stock at Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft, so why should I care if their consoles sell a lot? I get nothing from it." O rly?

Sales mean that your console will

1. Receive support.

2. That the chances of your system getting good games is increased.

3. That your console will have a longer lifespan if it does well.

Point 3 is actually quite interesting. Why do you think Microsoft dropped support for the Xbox so early? Well, they had to get a headstart. That's what they thought anyway. The PS3 would be one heck of a challenge after all. If the Xbox had done better in sales, it would have received a higher amount of support, higher chances of getting good games and a longer lifespan.

Oh, and the Wii and the PS3 have only been out for what? 9 months? Or is it 10? Nobody expected much from the Wii in the beginning, did they? Developers were basically overrun with the success of the Wii.

yes, sales are important. But games are more important.

And high sales lead to better games. So it all works out well for us :)

the answer is hypocritical fanboys.

sales matter, but not as much as games, as said in the other replies.

Sales are of course a factor that is very important for continued support. Sheep know this, not because of the Wii, but because of the Gamecube.

Great games is a short term benefit, great sales are a long term assurance that more are to come. See: Dreamcast.

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=25900876

Conversation ended.

Cows need to realize that the PS3 is not going to be another PS2, or PS1. It has crap games, and Sony is just trying to push some stupid hi def format, at the expense of the Playstation brandname. The PS3 is simply feces, as compared to the PS2 or PS1, and will never hold a candle to either. accameron

But games matter 10x more!II-FBIsniper-II

People say that games are more important than sales. Yet without sales, would there be continued support for more good games?Hexagon_777

We all buy a game that has sold 25 million in it's first release week right??

:roll:

When a dev is looking at platform options for a new game, obviously higher install base is good. But that's not the only thing they look at. Not all games are meant to be played with a wii-mote. Seriously. Also, many devs see games as a story-telling medium, every bit as much as movies. HD consoles like 360 and PS3 can provide a much more cinematic gaming experience. From a technical side (leaving out any oppinion, pro or con, on gameplay) look at Heavenly Sword. Everything from the amount of detail in the textures to the real-time expressions, captured form the actors themselves is impressive. And not possible on a system like the Wii. (Or the 360, without making it multi-disc). Also, a good game can increase hardware sales, while good hardware sales do not automatically make a game good.

In conclusion, sure higher hardware sales make one platform tempting over another for third party devs, but when looking at a game concept, there is a lot more than just 'which system has the highest install-base' that is looked at.

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

Hexagon_777

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

When a dev is looking at platform options for a new game, obviously higher install base is good. But that's not the only thing they look at. Not all games are meant to be played with a wii-mote. Seriously. Also, many devs see games as a story-telling medium, every bit as much as movies. HD consoles like 360 and PS3 can provide a much more cinematic gaming experience. From a technical side (leaving out any oppinion, pro or con, on gameplay) look at Heavenly Sword. Everything from the amount of detail in the textures to the real-time expressions, captured form the actors themselves is impressive. And not possible on a system like the Wii. (Or the 360, without making it multi-disc). Also, a good game can increase hardware sales, while good hardware sales do not automatically make a game good.

In conclusion, sure higher hardware sales make one platform tempting over another for third party devs, but when looking at a game concept, there is a lot more than just 'which system has the highest install-base' that is looked at.

ianuilliam

What about expenses, though? What you described would obviously bring along quite an outlay. You need to make up for the production costs and if the system you're producing for does not sell, then it's kind of pointless to make a masterpiece on it if you go broke.

[QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

squirrel337

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

When a dev is looking at platform options for a new game, obviously higher install base is good. But that's not the only thing they look at. Not all games are meant to be played with a wii-mote. Seriously. Also, many devs see games as a story-telling medium, every bit as much as movies. HD consoles like 360 and PS3 can provide a much more cinematic gaming experience. From a technical side (leaving out any oppinion, pro or con, on gameplay) look at Heavenly Sword. Everything from the amount of detail in the textures to the real-time expressions, captured form the actors themselves is impressive. And not possible on a system like the Wii. (Or the 360, without making it multi-disc). Also, a good game can increase hardware sales, while good hardware sales do not automatically make a game good.

In conclusion, sure higher hardware sales make one platform tempting over another for third party devs, but when looking at a game concept, there is a lot more than just 'which system has the highest install-base' that is looked at.

Hexagon_777

What about expenses, though? What you described would obviously bring along quite an outlay. You need to make up for the production costs and if the system you're producing for does not sell, then it's kind of pointless to make a masterpiece on it if you go broke.

[QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

squirrel337

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

Sales matter according to the industry and trends; unfortunately they lack as much relevance in who "wins" the system wars.DaAznSaN

The PS2 won because of sales due to sales leading to more games.

[QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

Hexagon_777

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

No because a hardcore game is not going to sell well on the wii because it has a diffrent target audience. That is why the wii will not get blockbuster games like GTA and RE5.

[QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

squirrel337

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

No because a hardcore game is not going to sell well on the wii because it has a diffrent target audience. That is why the wii will not get blockbuster games like GTA and RE5.

Is Metroid Prime 3 a casual title? Is it not selling well?

[QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

squirrel337

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

No because a hardcore game is not going to sell well on the wii because it has a diffrent target audience. That is why the wii will not get blockbuster games like GTA and RE5.

Eh...The Wii is not getting those games because it can't handle them from what I know. It has nothing to do with the audience. Besides, Metroid Prime 3 got released just recently and sold very well, despite it being a hardcore game.

[QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

NECR0CHILD313

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

No because a hardcore game is not going to sell well on the wii because it has a diffrent target audience. That is why the wii will not get blockbuster games like GTA and RE5.

Is Metroid Prime 3 a casual title? Is it not selling well?

It's a nintendo game. Nintendo games are the only hardcore games that sell on nintendo systems

.

[QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

NECR0CHILD313

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

No because a hardcore game is not going to sell well on the wii because it has a diffrent target audience. That is why the wii will not get blockbuster games like GTA and RE5.

Is Metroid Prime 3 a casual title? Is it not selling well?

[QUOTE="NECR0CHILD313"][QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

Is it not common sense that developers will support the console with the largest userbase?

briguyb13

No. They support the console that makes them the most money. If the 360 has a very high attach rate then the 360 could make them more money.

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

No because a hardcore game is not going to sell well on the wii because it has a diffrent target audience. That is why the wii will not get blockbuster games like GTA and RE5.

Is Metroid Prime 3 a casual title? Is it not selling well?

You seem to be implying that there was a time when this forum was more than just a good place to have a laugh.

Regardless of Red Steel's quality, is it a casual-oriented game? Did it not break the 1 million mark?

NECR0CHILD313

Oh wow 1 million. How many copies did halo 3 sell? Oh right 1 million and the games not even out.

[QUOTE="briguyb13"][QUOTE="NECR0CHILD313"][QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"]

True. Yet if the Wii, for example, has a larger userbase, then the chances of them buying that game are higher as well. So don't our arguments cancel each other out?

ianuilliam

No because a hardcore game is not going to sell well on the wii because it has a diffrent target audience. That is why the wii will not get blockbuster games like GTA and RE5.

Is Metroid Prime 3 a casual title? Is it not selling well?

You seem to be implying that there was a time when this forum was more than just a good place to have a laugh.

[QUOTE="NECR0CHILD313"]

Regardless of Red Steel's quality, is it a casual-oriented game? Did it not break the 1 million mark?

squirrel337

Oh wow 1 million. How many copies did halo 3 sell? Oh right 1 million and the games not even out.

What does that have to do with anything? Furthermore, Halo 3 is first-party as well. I thought those don't count. ;)

[QUOTE="squirrel337"][QUOTE="NECR0CHILD313"]

Regardless of Red Steel's quality, is it a casual-oriented game? Did it not break the 1 million mark?

Hexagon_777

Oh wow 1 million. How many copies did halo 3 sell? Oh right 1 million and the games not even out.

What does that have to do with anything? Furthermore, Halo 3 is first-party as well. I thought those don't count. ;)

The point is one million is NOT a big deal. Selling one million is not amazing.

Nintendo should just buy a bunch of developers with their new found cash cow, so the games are "made" by Nintendo. speaking of Properties and developers to be bought, maybe Nintendo should get dibs on Tomb Raider.

So sales matter because they lead to games?

If that's so, then that should show itself when the games are released. It generally is the case, but shouldn't we be focusing on the important end result (the games) rather than a cause of the result?

So sales matter because they lead to games?

If that's so, then that should show itself when the games are released. It generally is the case, but shouldn't we be focusing on the important end result (the games) rather than a cause of the result?

sonicmj1

If there is no cause, there is no result.

[QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

So sales matter because they lead to games?

If that's so, then that should show itself when the games are released. It generally is the case, but shouldn't we be focusing on the important end result (the games) rather than a cause of the result?

Hexagon_777

If there is no cause, there is no result.

But that isn't always true. The Dreamcast had plenty of great games without too many sales. Heck, all consoles get some good games. There are a number of reasons why a good game is made for a certain console, and sales are only one factor.

The games are what matter. The sales are only a vehicle to bring games.

[QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

So sales matter because they lead to games?

If that's so, then that should show itself when the games are released. It generally is the case, but shouldn't we be focusing on the important end result (the games) rather than a cause of the result?

sonicmj1

If there is no cause, there is no result.

But that isn't always true. The Dreamcast had plenty of great games without too many sales. Heck, all consoles get some good games. There are a number of reasons why a good game is made for a certain console, and sales are only one factor.

The games are what matter. The sales are only a vehicle to bring games.

The Dreamcast had many great games, correct, but did it have the sales to keep it alive and let it bask in even more great games? No. Like you said, sales bring us games. Without sales, what would keep the console alive and make it get support?

Quality and games are more important than sales PERIOD

Quality and games are more important than sales PERIOD

DeadMan1290

Did you even read what I wrote? Without sales, the chances of getting more games decrease, and if the chances of getting more games decrease, then the chances of getting quality games decrease as well. It's not that hard to understand.

[QUOTE="DeadMan1290"]

Quality and games are more important than sales PERIOD

Hexagon_777

Did you even read what I wrote? Without sales, the chances of getting more games decrease, and if the chances of getting more games decrease, then the chances of getting quality games decrease as well. It's not that hard to understand.

There's a stickyed thread about this wwe don't need to go through this people.

[QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="DeadMan1290"]

Quality and games are more important than sales PERIOD

DeadMan1290

Did you even read what I wrote? Without sales, the chances of getting more games decrease, and if the chances of getting more games decrease, then the chances of getting quality games decrease as well. It's not that hard to understand.

There's a stickyed thread about this wwe don't need to go through this people.

He sure didn't justify why we are picking games over sales. Furthermore, if he says that games come first and sales come second then they are still important obviously. Good job at avoiding my argument, though.

[QUOTE="DeadMan1290"][QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="DeadMan1290"]

Quality and games are more important than sales PERIOD

Hexagon_777

Did you even read what I wrote? Without sales, the chances of getting more games decrease, and if the chances of getting more games decrease, then the chances of getting quality games decrease as well. It's not that hard to understand.

There's a stickyed thread about this wwe don't need to go through this people.

He sure didn't justify why we are picking games over sales. Furthermore, if he says that games come first and sales come second then they are still important obviously. Good job at avoiding my argument, though.

Answer this though.....If a game sells only ONE THOUSAND copies but it's an awesome game that you really like....You won't buy it because it's sales sucked?

Answer this though.....If a game sells only ONE THOUSAND copies but it's an awesome game that you really like....You won't buy it because it's sales sucked?

DeadMan1290

What does that have to do with anything discussed in my thread? You're obviously getting the wrong idea.

[QUOTE="DeadMan1290"]

Answer this though.....If a game sells only ONE THOUSAND copies but it's an awesome game that you really like....You won't buy it because it's sales sucked?

Hexagon_777

What does that have to do with anything discussed in my thread? You're obviously getting the wrong idea.

Your whole pointhasn't been that??:? Then what IS the point??