800, 000 is a hair dude? thats nearly a million units the 360 outsold the Ps3 worrldwide by last year,loldelta3074So you want to enhance 800K as the greatest thing ever,so how can any one downplay 1.6 million lead which is double of the 800K you hyping.?
VGchartz: PS3 outsold Xbox by almost 2 millions in 2012
This topic is locked from further discussion.
it's not that we think it does not happen, of course it does but unless you have evidence it has happened then it's just a conspiracy theory and nothing more, in this world it's innocent until PROVEN guilty dude.delta3074Oh yeah some one will walk into gamespot office and video tape the bribe or secret contract under strict NDA that gamespot and MS sign,and there most be one since the xbox 360 is not an open platform where you release apps because you say so,even more when XBLG is involve oh an it does require gold.
[QUOTE="delta3074"] 800, 000 is a hair dude? thats nearly a million units the 360 outsold the Ps3 worrldwide by last year,loltormentosSo you want to enhance 800K as the greatest thing ever,so how can any one downplay 1.6 million lead which is double of the 800K you hyping.?where did i down play it? i just pointed out that it doesn't mean the Ps3 has overtaken the 360 in overall hardware sales, you where the one that was proved wrong about how much the 360 had sold this year "bu-bu-bu the Data was missing...." , how the F*** is me pointing out that 800,000 isn't a 'hair' as you put hyping it? you are a very strange individual who reads more into what people write than they actually mean, apparently pointing out somebodys mistake is hyping something now,lol
I grow tired of this topic I've been on this board for the majority of this gen, and every year I've seen the same proclamation that the PS3 has outsold the 360, and yet NPD numbers favour the 360, the all format chart in the UK generally favours the 360, software sales when reported generally demonstrate 360 versions outselling their PS3's counterparts, sometimes even by as much as a factor of 2, and yet every year the PS3 apparently catches up to the 360 the only way I can reconcile such a disparity is the Japanese/Asian market, where gaming tastes are clearly different to the western market, and we know the PS3 enjoys dominance over the 360. So the question remains could we have a situation where the PS3 could end up with more installed users thanks to Asia, yet the 360 userbase still be more valuable to western publishers as the Asian marketplace doesn't buy the games they make? sonny2dapWhat you don't get is this. First NPD account for US the xbox 360 while doing better is not selling 2 to 1 vs the PS3,on UK the xbox 360 sell better but again is not 2 to 1. Now UK is part of EU where the PS3 sells more,saying the xbox 360 wins in UK is like saying the PS3 won in New York and loss the remaining 49 states. The rest of EU >>>>>>> UK in sales. And on Japan the xbox 360 is officially dead been outsold recently 26 to 1 many times ever worst. Probably the PS3 is like 1.8 or less million behind the xbox 360 we will know for sure when sony second quarter sales drop.
[QUOTE="delta3074"] it's not that we think it does not happen, of course it does but unless you have evidence it has happened then it's just a conspiracy theory and nothing more, in this world it's innocent until PROVEN guilty dude.tormentosOh yeah some one will walk into gamespot office and video tape the bribe or secret contract under strict NDA that gamespot and MS sign,and there most be one since the xbox 360 is not an open platform where you release apps because you say so,even more when XBLG is involve oh an it does require gold.Thats why it's called a conspiracy theory dude, because it cannot be proven or disproven, keep up dude.
[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="delta3074"] 800, 000 is a hair dude? thats nearly a million units the 360 outsold the Ps3 worrldwide by last year,loldelta3074So you want to enhance 800K as the greatest thing ever,so how can any one downplay 1.6 million lead which is double of the 800K you hyping.?where did i down play it? i just pointed out that it doesn't mean the Ps3 has overtaken the 360 in overall hardware sales, you where the one that was proved wrong about how much the 360 had sold this year "bu-bu-bu the Data was missing...." , how the F*** is me pointing out that 800,000 isn't a 'hair' as you put hyping it? you are a very strange individual who reads more into what people write than they actually mean, apparently pointing out somebodys mistake is hyping something now,lol No you just claim that 800K is not a hair that is something much bigger and then lol,the PS3 has 1.6 million lead already by your argument the PS3 is killing the xbox 360 in sales. Second data was missing in fact i even asked 3 times how 67+ 1.7 = 70 million and you ran scare because it did not add to you either,and now you pretend like you knew it all alone,please you are a joke.
nintendo should be worried about those vita numbers
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Thats why it's called a conspiracy theory dude, because it cannot be proven or disproven, keep up dude.delta3074You can call it what you want,Jeff Gerstmann wasn't a conspiracy he was fire because gamespot choose to keep it hundreds of thousandth of dollars in advertisement than to keep a good reviewer. Gamespot has a sign contract with MS for an app that require live gold and that use Kinect,you can spin it that is a fact.
i did know all along that the 360 had sold 70 millon, you where the only person questioning that figure, i have been claiming this ENTIRE thread that the 360 has sold 70 million, i didn't run scared at all, i tried to explain to you how MS fiscal quarters work and you just kept rambling the same old BS that MS apparently 'lied' about the 360's sales, you really need to quit with the BS dude, i swear you must be a compulsive liar or something.delta3074Yeah you knew.:lol: I asked you 3 times dude.. Dude the damn post you quote me stated that MS report are different from sony,you were telling me something i already knew. Fact is the xbox 360 is been outsold by 1.6 million a ton of units by your argument of 800K is not a hair,i don't think the xbox 360 will catch up,specially now that report shows the PS3 spiking in UK,Japan and probably the rest of EU to.
[QUOTE="delta3074"]Thats why it's called a conspiracy theory dude, because it cannot be proven or disproven, keep up dude.tormentosYou can all it what you want,Jeff Gerstmann wasn't a conspiracy he was fire because gamespot choose to keep it hundreds of thousandth of dollars in advertisement than to keep a good reviewer. Gamespot has a sign contract with MS for an app that require live gold and that use Kinect,you can spin it that is a fact. There was actually no concrete evidence of that just conjecture, nobody actually admitted to anything and why is it such a problem that Gamespot has an APP on the xbox 360, how does that prove that Gamespot are somehow in bed with MS? it doesn't prove a damn thing and thats my point, everything you have claimed is wild speculation and conjecture, nothing more
There was actually no concrete evidence of that just conjecture, nobody actually admitted to anything and why is it such a problem that Gamespot has an APP on the xbox 360, how does that prove that Gamespot are somehow in bed with MS? it doesn't prove a damn thing and thats my point, everything you have claimed is wild speculation and conjecture, nothing moredelta3074You don't release anything on 360 even less xbox live gold without having a contract,and if HBO GO,Netflix and other features the xbox 360 has get time exclusive are to go by Gamespot has probably and exclusivity deal with MS,which will prevent the app from appearing on any other platform either time exclusive or full exclusivity that cost moneyyyyyy.... This is a general gaming site not and xbox 360 one.
ps3 will never outsell 360, the end.
[QUOTE="sts106mat"] you dont know why he was fired, it looks like that was the case, but no official statement (at least that i am aware of) = means you are guessing. you conveniently ignored my question , so are IGN also biased since they now have an app on 360? .tormentosYes Gamespot will issue a statement saying we fire Jeff because he underscore a game and the publisher that was paying us a ton of money did no like it.. My god dude for real.? And IGN is not doing what gamestop is,funny how in 1 game they rate it 9 and gamespot almost always is lower,yet on Fable IGN gave it 7.2 which already was generous by the meta score the game has,and some how gamespot got it even higher,do you know that IGN rated The Unfinished Swan with 9.0 right.? On Gamespot 6.5 is not only a huge difference in score,but even from the damn average of gamerankng gamespot score is way off,it has 80.. Coincidence.?
again, conjecture.
you have no proof that GS was payed to give Fable a higher score
cant believe lems get so butthurt over vgchartz
cmon bro wheres the compassion, they have no gamescant believe lems get so butthurt over vgchartz, if they believe it's fake then PISS OFF!
Meeeper282
hm....it seems to me el tormo is right...gertsmann was fired for giving kane and lynch a bad review and thus endangering ad revenue dollars...So he was fired because the boss crapped his pants when the advertising company expressed their intention to quit spending money with Gamespot. the boss was also later replaced after the whole messy situation.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116360-Jeff-Gerstmann-Explains-His-Departure-From-Gamespot
In 2007, Jeff Gerstmann was fired from his editorial director role at Gamespot. This afternoon, he finally got a chance to clear the air on exactly what happened.
Backstory: Following a less-than-glowing review ofKane & Lynch: Dead Men, Jeff Gerstmann was shown the door by the management at Gamespot. Immediately, the internet burst into a frenzy, claiming that the gaming site was motivated purely by greed, and that Gerstmann's review had marred the group's friendly relationship with publisher Eidos (a company, it should be noted, that was heavily advertisingKane & Lynchon the site at the time).
In turn, Gerstmann went on to form Giant Bomb, a gaming site that has become a success in its own right, both due to its editorial quality, and undoubtedly as a benefit of the furor surrounding Gerstmann's scandalous employment shift.
This morning it was announced that Gamespot parent company CBS had acquired Giant Bomb, and was moving the site's HQ into the same building currently occupied by Gamespot. Realizing the confusion this might caused, both Gerstmann and the Gamespot team decided that it was time to explain exactly what happened all those years ago.
The issue, Gerstmann claimed in a streaming interview, was that a new management team inexperienced in dealing with editorial groups, had come to power at Gamespot and overreacted to what Gerstmann describes as "publisher push-back." According to his recollection, Eidos threatened to pull ad revenue from Gamespot as a result of his review, and though this kind of thing is relatively common in games journalism, the nascent management team panicked and decided that Gerstmann was unreliable. "They felt they couldn't trust me in the role," Gerstmann said.
"We did what an editorial team does. We did what we were supposed to be doing. We reviewed games, we instructed people about the quality of games, and we were completely honest," he added. "This management team buckled when faced with having a lot of ad dollars walk out the door."
Following the incident -- which Gerstmann calls "the craziest thing that's ever happened to me" -- he was deluged with attention. To the point that his parents were getting phone calls from Norwegian newspapers at four in the morning.
Eventually things blew over, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who was present in the gaming world back then who doesn't immediately associate Gerstmann with the incident.
Thus, today's live interview, which Gerstmann and the Gamespot team hope will set the stage for their continued success. The management team who originally canned Gerstmann are no longer with the company, and according to the man himself the content of Giant Bomb will be in no way censored or lessened by this new business agreement.
And with that, a dark chapter in the history of games journalism draws to a close. A setting sun gives way to an even brighter tomorrow, or something. Now who's up for tacos?
sts106mat
[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"][QUOTE="sts106mat"]hm....it seems to me el tormo is right...gertsmann was fired for giving kane and lynch a bad review and thus endangering ad revenue dollars... yeah, thats true, the dude who fired him was moved on because it was a big mistake. that a website gets paid advertising revenue from the companies isn't news, the people at fault are the advertisers, they should not threaten crap like that. Yeah great, so tou have 1 isolated case and it is a shame. I just love how the man adds 1 and 1 and then comes up with 4 and can't provide any facts as to how he got there...So he was fired because the boss crapped his pants when the advertising company expressed their intention to quit spending money with Gamespot. the boss was also later replaced after the whole messy situation.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116360-Jeff-Gerstmann-Explains-His-Departure-From-Gamespot
In 2007, Jeff Gerstmann was fired from his editorial director role at Gamespot. This afternoon, he finally got a chance to clear the air on exactly what happened.
Backstory: Following a less-than-glowing review ofKane & Lynch: Dead Men, Jeff Gerstmann was shown the door by the management at Gamespot. Immediately, the internet burst into a frenzy, claiming that the gaming site was motivated purely by greed, and that Gerstmann's review had marred the group's friendly relationship with publisher Eidos (a company, it should be noted, that was heavily advertisingKane & Lynchon the site at the time).
In turn, Gerstmann went on to form Giant Bomb, a gaming site that has become a success in its own right, both due to its editorial quality, and undoubtedly as a benefit of the furor surrounding Gerstmann's scandalous employment shift.
This morning it was announced that Gamespot parent company CBS had acquired Giant Bomb, and was moving the site's HQ into the same building currently occupied by Gamespot. Realizing the confusion this might caused, both Gerstmann and the Gamespot team decided that it was time to explain exactly what happened all those years ago.
The issue, Gerstmann claimed in a streaming interview, was that a new management team inexperienced in dealing with editorial groups, had come to power at Gamespot and overreacted to what Gerstmann describes as "publisher push-back." According to his recollection, Eidos threatened to pull ad revenue from Gamespot as a result of his review, and though this kind of thing is relatively common in games journalism, the nascent management team panicked and decided that Gerstmann was unreliable. "They felt they couldn't trust me in the role," Gerstmann said.
"We did what an editorial team does. We did what we were supposed to be doing. We reviewed games, we instructed people about the quality of games, and we were completely honest," he added. "This management team buckled when faced with having a lot of ad dollars walk out the door."
Following the incident -- which Gerstmann calls "the craziest thing that's ever happened to me" -- he was deluged with attention. To the point that his parents were getting phone calls from Norwegian newspapers at four in the morning.
Eventually things blew over, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who was present in the gaming world back then who doesn't immediately associate Gerstmann with the incident.
Thus, today's live interview, which Gerstmann and the Gamespot team hope will set the stage for their continued success. The management team who originally canned Gerstmann are no longer with the company, and according to the man himself the content of Giant Bomb will be in no way censored or lessened by this new business agreement.
And with that, a dark chapter in the history of games journalism draws to a close. A setting sun gives way to an even brighter tomorrow, or something. Now who's up for tacos?
sts106mat
[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"][QUOTE="sts106mat"]hm....it seems to me el tormo is right...gertsmann was fired for giving kane and lynch a bad review and thus endangering ad revenue dollars... yeah, thats true, the dude who fired him was moved on because it was a big mistake. that a website gets paid advertising revenue from the companies isn't news, the people at fault are the advertisers, they should not threaten crap like that. But they do and there's no way to avoid it. A couple of weeks ago an ex Edge employee said that same thing happened at Edge. It's not a secret that the game reviews business is plagued by these type of things. And is not a secret that M$ is used to give pressure for good reviews, hell they used to keep a black book for "unfriendly" reviewers, they probably still do.So he was fired because the boss crapped his pants when the advertising company expressed their intention to quit spending money with Gamespot. the boss was also later replaced after the whole messy situation.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116360-Jeff-Gerstmann-Explains-His-Departure-From-Gamespot
In 2007, Jeff Gerstmann was fired from his editorial director role at Gamespot. This afternoon, he finally got a chance to clear the air on exactly what happened.
Backstory: Following a less-than-glowing review ofKane & Lynch: Dead Men, Jeff Gerstmann was shown the door by the management at Gamespot. Immediately, the internet burst into a frenzy, claiming that the gaming site was motivated purely by greed, and that Gerstmann's review had marred the group's friendly relationship with publisher Eidos (a company, it should be noted, that was heavily advertisingKane & Lynchon the site at the time).
In turn, Gerstmann went on to form Giant Bomb, a gaming site that has become a success in its own right, both due to its editorial quality, and undoubtedly as a benefit of the furor surrounding Gerstmann's scandalous employment shift.
This morning it was announced that Gamespot parent company CBS had acquired Giant Bomb, and was moving the site's HQ into the same building currently occupied by Gamespot. Realizing the confusion this might caused, both Gerstmann and the Gamespot team decided that it was time to explain exactly what happened all those years ago.
The issue, Gerstmann claimed in a streaming interview, was that a new management team inexperienced in dealing with editorial groups, had come to power at Gamespot and overreacted to what Gerstmann describes as "publisher push-back." According to his recollection, Eidos threatened to pull ad revenue from Gamespot as a result of his review, and though this kind of thing is relatively common in games journalism, the nascent management team panicked and decided that Gerstmann was unreliable. "They felt they couldn't trust me in the role," Gerstmann said.
"We did what an editorial team does. We did what we were supposed to be doing. We reviewed games, we instructed people about the quality of games, and we were completely honest," he added. "This management team buckled when faced with having a lot of ad dollars walk out the door."
Following the incident -- which Gerstmann calls "the craziest thing that's ever happened to me" -- he was deluged with attention. To the point that his parents were getting phone calls from Norwegian newspapers at four in the morning.
Eventually things blew over, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who was present in the gaming world back then who doesn't immediately associate Gerstmann with the incident.
Thus, today's live interview, which Gerstmann and the Gamespot team hope will set the stage for their continued success. The management team who originally canned Gerstmann are no longer with the company, and according to the man himself the content of Giant Bomb will be in no way censored or lessened by this new business agreement.
And with that, a dark chapter in the history of games journalism draws to a close. A setting sun gives way to an even brighter tomorrow, or something. Now who's up for tacos?
sts106mat
[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] But they do and there's no way to avoid it. A couple of weeks ago an ex Edge employee said that same thing happened at Edge. It's not a secret that the game reviews business is plagued by these type of things. And is not a secret that M$ is used to give pressure for good reviews, hell they used to keep a black book for "unfriendly" reviewers, they probably still do.kuraimenso sony paid for all the MGS4 reviews as well as the Uncharted ones, cool. Could be thing is M$ has been known to do stuff like that. Never heard of Sony though but it wouldn't surprise me, although they don't have as much money as M$ to spend on that.you can't claim to know that.
just because a company is better off then another one does not mean it has a bigger budget for everything
Could be thing is M$ has been known to do stuff like that. Never heard of Sony though but it wouldn't surprise me, although they don't have as much money as M$ to spend on that.you can't claim to know that.[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="sts106mat"] so sony paid for all the MGS4 reviews as well as the Uncharted ones, cool.rilpas
just because a company is better off then another one does not mean it has a bigger budget for everything
Microsoft spends much more money in advertisement than Sony. Hell Microsoft spent $500 million in Kinect alone. When has Sony done that? They don't have that kind of money.[QUOTE="rilpas"]you can't claim to know that.[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Could be thing is M$ has been known to do stuff like that. Never heard of Sony though but it wouldn't surprise me, although they don't have as much money as M$ to spend on that.kuraimen
just because a company is better off then another one does not mean it has a bigger budget for everything
Microsoft spends much more money in advertisement than Sony. Hell Microsoft spent $500 million in Kinect alone. When has Sony done that? They don't have that kind of money.not the same thing
again, we don't know what are the budgets for either of them
and that's assuming either of them do this on a regular basis. I will tell you this, if Sony does pay off reviewers, I'm sure they'd focus on non-english countries while Microsoft does the opposite. Certainly would explain some Portuguese, Spanish and Italian publications I've seen
Microsoft spends much more money in advertisement than Sony. Hell Microsoft spent $500 million in Kinect alone. When has Sony done that? They don't have that kind of money.[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="rilpas"]you can't claim to know that.
just because a company is better off then another one does not mean it has a bigger budget for everything
rilpas
not the same thing
again, we don't know what are the budgets for either of them
and that's assuming either of them do this on a regular basis. I will tell you this, if Sony does pay off reviewers, I'm sure they'd focus on non-english countries while Microsoft does the opposite. Certainly would explain some Portuguese, Spanish and Italian publications I've seen
The advertisement itself is a pay off. Look at the Gertsmann thing. If M$ invests a million dollars in advertisement in GS for Kinect they would expect some good reviews. If not they take the advertisement away. And GS needs and likes money. Simple as that. Is not even against the law. Is not even a conspiracy theory that's how things work.[QUOTE="rilpas"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Microsoft spends much more money in advertisement than Sony. Hell Microsoft spent $500 million in Kinect alone. When has Sony done that? They don't have that kind of money.kuraimen
not the same thing
again, we don't know what are the budgets for either of them
and that's assuming either of them do this on a regular basis. I will tell you this, if Sony does pay off reviewers, I'm sure they'd focus on non-english countries while Microsoft does the opposite. Certainly would explain some Portuguese, Spanish and Italian publications I've seen
The advertisement itself is a pay off. Look at the Gertsmann thing. If M$ invests a million dollars in advertisement in GS for Kinect they would expect some good reviews. If not they take the advertisement away. And GS needs and likes money. Simple as that. Is not even against the law. Is not even a conspiracy theory that's how things work.I'm not saying GS accepts or doesn't accept it
and I'm not saying Microsoft pays or doesn't pay
I'm not even dwelving into that conspiray theory (yes, it's still a theory by the way)
I am however telling you that A) you can't claim one has a bigger budget then the other and B) that Van Ord received money to give it a higher score
you do know that maybe, just maybe, he actually liked the game?
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="rilpas"]you can't claim to know that.Microsoft spends much more money in advertisement than Sony. Hell Microsoft spent $500 million in Kinect alone. When has Sony done that? They don't have that kind of money. advertising is key, no good having a great product if nobody ever finds out about it. advertising =/= buying reviews. point yourself in the direction of steel batallion or other "flops" like Resident evil (which was advertised like a F*** on GS uk). you will soon see your dumb conspiracy theories hold no water. I'm not saying advertisement shouldn't exist but that doesn't change the fact that it affects the "objectivity" of the review business. Besides advertisement is not all. Two of my favorite games this gen Demon's Souls and The Witcher 2 had very little advertisement and well they sold well enough and were good.just because a company is better off then another one does not mean it has a bigger budget for everything
sts106mat
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="rilpas"]The advertisement itself is a pay off. Look at the Gertsmann thing. If M$ invests a million dollars in advertisement in GS for Kinect they would expect some good reviews. If not they take the advertisement away. And GS needs and likes money. Simple as that. Is not even against the law. Is not even a conspiracy theory that's how things work.not the same thing
again, we don't know what are the budgets for either of them
and that's assuming either of them do this on a regular basis. I will tell you this, if Sony does pay off reviewers, I'm sure they'd focus on non-english countries while Microsoft does the opposite. Certainly would explain some Portuguese, Spanish and Italian publications I've seen
sts106mat
I'm not saying GS accepts or doesn't accept it
and I'm not saying Microsoft pays or doesn't pay
I'm not even dwelving into that conspiray theory (yes, it's still a theory by the way)
I am however telling you that A) you can't claim one has a bigger budget then the other and B) that Van Ord received money to give it a higher score
you do know that maybe, just maybe, he actually liked the game?
Why can't I claim that one has a bigger budget than the other. The $500 million M$ spent in Kinect was over all the news find me where Sony invested like that in advertisement.
Why can't I claim that one has a bigger budget than the other. kuraimenbecause, as far as I Know, you don't have a spreasheet of their advertising budgets
The $500 million M$ spent in Kinect was over all the news find me where Sony invested like that in advertisement. kuraimen
If Kinect is your example then you've made my case for me.
that was one item, a one time thing.
For all we know, Sony has a bigger advertising budget but it includes more stuff that they need to advertise so it's trickled down
the same could've applied to microsoft and they could've decided to use the bulk of their budget on Kinect.
the possibilities are close to limitless.
As I've stated several time on this board, I have a degree on accountacy, you can't just take one case, one item and start paiting everything with the same brush
EDIT: Just an example, did you know a third of Men In black 3's budget was spent on publicity?
because, as far as I Know, you don't have a spreasheet of their advertising budgets[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Why can't I claim that one has a bigger budget than the other. rilpas
The $500 million M$ spent in Kinect was over all the news find me where Sony invested like that in advertisement. kuraimen
If Kinect is your example then you've made my case for me.
that was one item, a one time thing.
For all we know, Sony has a bigger advertising budget but it includes more stuff that they need to advertise so it's trickled down
the same could've applied to microsoft and they could've decided to use the bulk of their budget on Kinect.
the possibilities are close to limitless.
As I've stated several time on this board, I have a degree on accountacy, you can't just take one case, one item and start paiting everything with the same brush
EDIT: Just an example, did you know a third of Men In black 3's budget was spent on publicity?
Well all evidence seems to point to M$ having much more money for that. From the fact that M$ has much more money as a whole to the fact that M$ spent $500 million on one accessory while Sony barely even advertise theirs (Move). Unless I see some clear evidence to the contrary it's just common sense for me.] Well all evidence seems to point to M$ having much more money for that. From the fact that M$ has much more money as a whole to the fact that M$ spent $500 million on one accessory while Sony barely even advertise theirs (Move). Unless I see some clear evidence to the contrary it's just common sense for me. kuraimen
they spend 150 million advertising Men in black 3
that's just one movie out of the several they published in 2012
not counting games, consoles, add-ons, phones and who knows whatelse
oh and I'll leave you with this:
"Sega of America is readying a $500 million promotional blitz designed to prolong the life of its 16-bit games.
The company's promotional partners - including Coca-Cola Co., Southland Corp.'s 7-Eleven stores and retailer Foot Locker - will supply a combined $100 million in promotional support, with retailers expected to kick in $150 million, largely through advertising, White said.
The combined $500 million rivals what Hollywood spends advertising feature films during a six-month period and represents a hefty increase over Sega's $350 million budget for the same period last year.
Sega's advertising blitz comes at a time when the company has the edge on advanced cartridge-based game technology. In November, it will introduce its Genesis 32X peripheral, which boosts Genesis and Sega CD players to 32-bit processing power (VB, 3/25). The 32X will be priced at $149."
See what I mean by one time things? sega spent more advertising on the 32x then they did for anything else they ever created and just for for some extra giggles, the following year, Sega had a netloss of 700 million
the link unfortunately was lost through time, so I'll have to leave you with a forum post
[QUOTE="kuraimen"]] Well all evidence seems to point to M$ having much more money for that. From the fact that M$ has much more money as a whole to the fact that M$ spent $500 million on one accessory while Sony barely even advertise theirs (Move). Unless I see some clear evidence to the contrary it's just common sense for me. rilpas
they spend 150 million advertising Men in black 3
that's just one movie out of the several they published in 2012
not counting games, consoles, add-ons, phones and who knows whatelse
oh and I'll leave you with this:
"Sega of America is readying a $500 million promotional blitz designed to prolong the life of its 16-bit games.
The company's promotional partners - including Coca-Cola Co., Southland Corp.'s 7-Eleven stores and retailer Foot Locker - will supply a combined $100 million in promotional support, with retailers expected to kick in $150 million, largely through advertising, White said.
The combined $500 million rivals what Hollywood spends advertising feature films during a six-month period and represents a hefty increase over Sega's $350 million budget for the same period last year.
Sega's advertising blitz comes at a time when the company has the edge on advanced cartridge-based game technology. In November, it will introduce its Genesis 32X peripheral, which boosts Genesis and Sega CD players to 32-bit processing power (VB, 3/25). The 32X will be priced at $149."
See what I mean by one time things? sega spent more advertising on the 32x then they did for anything else they ever created and just for for some extra giggles, the following year, Sega had a netloss of 700 million
the link unfortunately was lost through time, so I'll have to leave you with a forum post
So? that's a movie not games or consoles, those probably affected movie review sites not game review sites. I see more advertisement for the 360 than the PS3, anyone with eyes can see that and again $500 million on Kinect alone. Until I see the same type of investement done by Sony for the PS3 I think it's safe to say that M$ ad money is much more influencial in websites like GS.[QUOTE="rilpas"][QUOTE="kuraimen"]] Well all evidence seems to point to M$ having much more money for that. From the fact that M$ has much more money as a whole to the fact that M$ spent $500 million on one accessory while Sony barely even advertise theirs (Move). Unless I see some clear evidence to the contrary it's just common sense for me. kuraimen
they spend 150 million advertising Men in black 3
that's just one movie out of the several they published in 2012
not counting games, consoles, add-ons, phones and who knows whatelse
oh and I'll leave you with this:
"Sega of America is readying a $500 million promotional blitz designed to prolong the life of its 16-bit games.
The company's promotional partners - including Coca-Cola Co., Southland Corp.'s 7-Eleven stores and retailer Foot Locker - will supply a combined $100 million in promotional support, with retailers expected to kick in $150 million, largely through advertising, White said.
The combined $500 million rivals what Hollywood spends advertising feature films during a six-month period and represents a hefty increase over Sega's $350 million budget for the same period last year.
Sega's advertising blitz comes at a time when the company has the edge on advanced cartridge-based game technology. In November, it will introduce its Genesis 32X peripheral, which boosts Genesis and Sega CD players to 32-bit processing power (VB, 3/25). The 32X will be priced at $149."
See what I mean by one time things? sega spent more advertising on the 32x then they did for anything else they ever created and just for for some extra giggles, the following year, Sega had a netloss of 700 million
the link unfortunately was lost through time, so I'll have to leave you with a forum post
So? that's a movie not games or consoles, those probably affected movie review sites not game review sites. I see more advertisement for the 360 than the PS3, anyone with eyes can see that and again $500 million on Kinect alone. Until I see the same type of investement done by Sony for the PS3 I think it's safe to say that M$ ad money is much more influencial in websites like GS.so I guess by your logic, Sega has more money then Sony?
When did this thread turn into a conspracy theory thread?Jeff was fired because of an inexperience review/ad team on GS that couldn't handle the pressures of publishers withdrawing ad money from the site.Jeff's firing happened not just because of one review, but multiple reviews posted by reviewers on GS review team.And that GS app has nothing to do with Fable the Journey getting an 8.0 because the app has the same use as the IGN app on XBL.People can use it as an easy way to get their gaming news on GS.And that xbl subscription deal involving the app is just a little incentive to get the app.Now please stop acting like idiots cows because it's embrassing for your faction.
because if you don't have conspiracies then all you are left with is reality. And reality is harsh mistress, with no games and last place in sales.When did this thread turn into a conspracy theory thread?Jeff was fired because of an inexperience review/ad team on GS that couldn't handle the pressures of publishers withdrawing ad money from the site.Jeff's firing happened not just because of one review, but multiple reviews posted by reviewers on GS review team.And that GS app has nothing to do with Fable the Journey getting an 8.0 because the app has the same use as the IGN app on XBL.People can use it as an easy way to get their gaming news on GS.And that xbl subscription deal involving the app is just a little incentive to get the app.Now please stop acting like idiots cows because it's embrassing for your faction.
super600
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment