What gaming have to do with sales?

Why sales become important for defining quality of a game?

We use comparison of hardware sales to call which console is BETTER now?

I would like to understand the reasoning for some of you to use sales as quality measurement, intead of just fun, rating, gameplay, value, reliability and so on.

Most xbox 360 love to bash the superior ps3 exclusives games saying they sold less than Y game.

Wii fans this generation can only mention sales to support their claim that wii is best console.

And if there is a logic reasoning to explain why when discussing quality to mention sales..... (which i doubt)

...... would this reasoning still be truth when you think of pirated games and modded hardware?

Because a big share from wii/360 have hacked consoles to play "stolen" games. And these hacked hardware still count in the 50/30 million wii/360 sales. When the pirate bought the xbox360/wii planning to hack, he couldnt even consider the ps3 as the ps3 has no pirated games. So clearly his choice for not chosing the ps3 wasn't about quality, was because he was not truly a game consumer, and was unable to steal with a ps3.

Even with wii and 360 at least selling the hardware for the pirates, everyone know that the profit 1st party make are from games and not the console. So even if you were discussing businness wouldnt make sense, let alone QUALITY.

I could see in MMOPRG the sales/player be a factor in overall fun of the game, since mmorpg is around community. But other games, even online shooter, racers seem unlogical to factor sales in quality, but somehow, some kids in this forum still do.

I can recall most 360 owners saying they bought a 360 because their friends didn't have a ps3s. While this reasoning for buying makes sense, this reasoning when talking about quality becomes meaningless since what YOUR friends have is not a reedeeming for quality mesurement and which console is THE BEST.

Unless I mistake system wars for a GAMERS forum when in fact is dedicated for Investor, business and market trends discussion?

Please discuss....

If this is indeed a forum for investor discussion and not Gamer, please point me to the gamers section.

Well let's see.

360 has a library of games of great quality.

Lemmings have the ability to use both sales, and game quality as ownage, so why wouldn't they? It obviously upsets the cows.

Everything is based on opinion regardless of what has sold more or not.

sales matter to the seller, consumers shouldn't care.

Sales don't matter whatsoever when it comes to the quality of a game. But it'd be silly not to discuss sales in a forum called System Wars. After all, sales is a huge front of any console battle. Always has been, always will be.

Sales do have some sort of importance to the gamers.

Imagine that Halo: Combat Evolved (the first Halo) sold less than 10000 copies, even though it recieved alot of positive critical aclaim. Tim, who bought the game, instantly fell in love with the game from day one, and couldn't wait for the sequal. However, since the game failed miserably in sales, a sequal was never made, and thus Tim missed out on Halo 2, Halo 3 and Halo Wars.

Lets try this scenario. What if Counter Strike failed in sales, there wouldn't be many online to play with, there would be no updates for the game and no downloadable stuff, thus ruining the game.

Sales don't matter whatsoever when it comes to the quality of a game. But it'd be silly not to discuss sales in a forum called System Wars. After all, sales is a huge front of any console battle. Always has been, always will be.

Tragic_Kingdom7

Exactly.

No sales=No sequel to your favourite game.

I agree that the discussions around sales in SW are pretty pointless, going so indepth that it would only matter to investors and analysts. Consumers just shouldnt care that much.

Saying that, sales does, traditionally anyway, have a link to games. Usually, the more sales the hardware has, the more developers put their content on it, and the more THAT sells, the more chances of similar fantastic games appearing on the hardware. See the PS2.

Unfortunately, this generation, the Wii has stomped its competition into the ground sales wise, but developers find excuses to not put their best content on the machine. (Despite the fact Nintendo has been very accomodating for third parties, cheaper dev kits, accessability AND pretty much a whole year opening where they dont have to compete with first party games)

A lot of exclusives have just been announced though, so maybe this trend is finally starting to cease. Although its too late - I expect they will have to compete with Nintendo heavy hitters now.

Sales do have some sort of importance to the gamers.

Imagine that Halo: Combat Evolved (the first Halo) sold less than 10000 copies, even though it recieved alot of positive critical aclaim. Tim, who bought the game, instantly fell in love with the game from day one, and couldn't wait for the sequal. However, since the game failed miserably in sales, a sequal was never made, and thus Tim missed out on Halo 2, Halo 3 and Halo Wars.

Lets try this scenario. What if Counter Strike failed in sales, there wouldn't be many online to play with, there would be no updates for the game and no downloadable stuff, thus ruining the game.

mand_450

We can only wish that that would've happened with Halo...then maybe we wouldn't be bombarded at every corner with mediocre generic FPS's Zoso-8

Why sales become important for defining quality of a game?ropumar

We use comparison of hardware sales to call which console is BETTER now?ropumar

[QUOTE="Zoso-8"]We can only wish that that would've happened with Halo...then maybe we wouldn't be bombarded at every corner with mediocre generic FPS's Cherokee_Jack

Most people don't use sales to define the quality of a game. Its just a couple of fanboys.

Since almost everyone here agree that sales has nothing to do with quality, then why 360 and wii fans rely so much on it.

Is it because they know ps3 has a better hadrware, reliability, pirate proof and exclusives so they use the argument of sales even if is not aplied?

And since some think hardware sales matters because drawns 3rd party... lets discuss the pirate market share there is on the 360/wii:

If you take in to acccount wii is not 3rd party sales friend, the games costs 20-40$ 3 months after, and a huge share of the 50million are pirated that are never goinig to buy a game, this makes the wii worse than 360/ps3 for3rd party. Reasoning no 3rd party publishers NEVER breaks the 10milllion in developing a game for the wii.

And since ps3/360 has same sales figures in most multiplatform launched in 2008-2009 games even with the 360 having a 1 years ahead. So in reality while 360 has a bigger market share, in business perpective the 3rd have same interest for both consoles.

And sales of software for ps3 since 2008 are incrising while 360 remained more stable, mostly due new hardware sales going for pirates or are only people getting their second, third 360 for comfort or for RROD. (warranty donesnt covers lots of 360, like the imported/exported to some countries, and hacked consoles)

Will not even touch in the fact that ps3 is the one that i believe will most likely have bigger lifespan since this might issue some debates which are not the focus of this trhead.

In a third party perspective the ps3 now stands as the best console to invest. And Sony is the one that is most spending cash on 1st party games (even if you think they are bad they are the most expensive). So even if you say hardware sales for wii/360 this gen will make more future games and bigger investment in other games. SONY and PS3 are the ones with most 3rd and 1st party investiment, growing as of now.

Oh, so that's what this is about.Cherokee_Jack

:lol:

Oh, so that's what this is about.Cherokee_Jack

Why sales become important for defining quality of a game?

We use comparison of hardware sales to call which console is BETTER now?

I would like to understand the reasoning for some of you to use sales as quality measurement, intead of just fun, rating, gameplay, value, reliability and so on.

Most xbox 360 love to bash the superior ps3 exclusives games saying they sold less than Y game.

Wii fans this generation can only mention sales to support their claim that wii is best console.

And if there is a logic reasoning to explain why when discussing quality to mention sales..... (which i doubt)

...... would this reasoning still be truth when you think of pirated games and modded hardware?

Because a big share from wii/360 have hacked consoles to play "stolen" games. And these hacked hardware still count in the 50/30 million wii/360 sales. When the pirate bought the xbox360/wii planning to hack, he couldnt even consider the ps3 as the ps3 has no pirated games. So clearly his choice for not chosing the ps3 wasn't about quality, was because he was not truly a game consumer, and was unable to steal with a ps3.

Even with wii and 360 at least selling the hardware for the pirates, everyone know that the profit 1st party make are from games and not the console. So even if you were discussing businness wouldnt make sense, let alone QUALITY.

I could see in MMOPRG the sales/player be a factor in overall fun of the game, since mmorpg is around community. But other games, even online shooter, racers seem unlogical to factor sales in quality, but somehow, some kids in this forum still do.

I can recall most 360 owners saying they bought a 360 because their friends didn't have a ps3s. While this reasoning for buying makes sense, this reasoning when talking about quality becomes meaningless since what YOUR friends have is not a reedeeming for quality mesurement and which console is THE BEST.

Unless I mistake system wars for a GAMERS forum when in fact is dedicated for Investor, business and market trends discussion?

Please discuss....

If this is indeed a forum for investor discussion and not Gamer, please point me to the gamers section.

ropumar

So how do you think all the things that make up"quality" should be measured? What constitutes "quality" other than your opinion?

And you guessing the motives of 360 owners is rather arrogant, don't you think? Isn't it possible that some people just don't want a PS3? It's also funny how you tried to connect 360/Wii owners with pirates as if they are the rule rather than the exception.

I think you should skip the Investor forum and the Gamer forum and go to the fanboy forum (well, I guess that would beSW, but I think you get the picture).

and a huge share of the 50million are pirated

Prove it.

new hardware sales going for pirates or are only people getting their second, third 360 for comfort or for RROD. (warranty donesnt covers lots of 360, like the imported/exported to some countries, and hacked consoles)

Prove it.

Will not even touch in the fact that ps3 is the one that i believe will most likely have bigger lifespan since this might issue some debates which are not the focus of this trhead.

Good that you didn't touch it, since you can't prove that.

In a third party perspective the ps3 now stands as the best console to invest.

Still, the 360 get more quality (by the critic) third party games than the PS3.

ropumar

Interesting opinions, sadly none of them backed up or of much relevance.

Sales don't matter whatsoever when it comes to the quality of a game. But it'd be silly not to discuss sales in a forum called System Wars. After all, sales is a huge front of any console battle. Always has been, always will be.

Tragic_Kingdom7

Since almost everyone here agree that sales has nothing to do with quality, then why 360 and wii fans rely so much on it.

Is it because they know ps3 has a better hadrware, reliability, pirate proof and exclusives so they use the argument of sales even if is not aplied?

And since some think hardware sales matters because drawns 3rd party... lets discuss the pirate market share there is on the 360/wii:

If you take in to acccount wii is not 3rd party sales friend, the games costs 20-40$ 3 months after, and a huge share of the 50million are pirated that are never goinig to buy a game, this makes the wii worse than 360/ps3 for3rd party. Reasoning no 3rd party publishers NEVER breaks the 10milllion in developing a game for the wii.

And since ps3/360 has same sales figures in most multiplatform launched in 2008-2009 games even with the 360 having a 1 years ahead. So in reality while 360 has a bigger market share, in business perpective the 3rd have same interest for both consoles.

And sales of software for ps3 since 2008 are incrising while 360 remained more stable, mostly due new hardware sales going for pirates or are only people getting their second, third 360 for comfort or for RROD. (warranty donesnt covers lots of 360, like the imported/exported to some countries, and hacked consoles)

Will not even touch in the fact that ps3 is the one that i believe will most likely have bigger lifespan since this might issue some debates which are not the focus of this trhead.

In a third party perspective the ps3 now stands as the best console to invest. And Sony is the one that is most spending cash on 1st party games (even if you think they are bad they are the most expensive). So even if you say hardware sales for wii/360 this gen will make more future games and bigger investment in other games. SONY and PS3 are the ones with most 3rd and 1st party investiment, growing as of now.

ropumar

If you don't think sales matter, why are talking about them? That seems more than a little contradictory.

Basically, TC, if you want some detailed discussion on what system is THE BEST, you're not going to get it, because what console is THE BEST is mostly a matter of opinion. What you mostly get in System Wars is people doing their best to claim ownage on the systems opposing the ones they think is THE BEST. Sales is a way of doing that. Nobody's trying to change anybody's minds about which one's THE BEST. They are just trying to validate their own opinions by tearing down other consoles. In the PS3's case, sales are the weak point, so that's what they'll attack just as the PS3 fanboys will attack the current content drought that the 360 is going through.

You're trying to make something simple very complicated. And your excessive Sony love seems to be the catalyst for that. Your mind would probably be more at ease if you'd stop trying to convince other people that what you like is THE BEST.

Sales don't define the quality of a game. Sales only define how popular a game is.IronBass

yes sort of true. But what defines a game being popular?

what defines a quality game?

what defines a quality game?AdmiralBison

Well let's see.

360 has a library of games of great quality.

Lemmings have the ability to use both sales, and game quality as ownage, so why wouldn't they? It obviously upsets the cows.

Mr_Nordquist

true and there are more Cows here then Lemmings. System Wars is almost the opposite the real world.

PS3 at the moment seems to be the biggest thing here in systemwars but out there it's a different story.

[QUOTE="AdmiralBison"] what defines a quality game?IronBass

yes, but what but what defines popularity?

yes, but what but what defines popularity?AdmiralBison

[QUOTE="AdmiralBison"] what defines a quality game?IronBass

Exactly. And this is what the TC fails to understand. He's trying to objectively discuss something that is at its core subjective. I mean, some people think a game has to have a great story to be a great game whereas I don't give a **** as long as the story provides proper context. How does one reach some kind of objective truth when people's standards are so different in the first place?

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="AdmiralBison"] what defines a quality game?Tragic_Kingdom7

Exactly. And this is what the TC fails to understand. He's trying to objectively discuss something that is at its core subjective. I mean, some people think a game has to have a great story to be a great game whereas I don't give a **** as long as the story provides proper context. How does one reach some kind of objective truth when people's standards are so different in the first place?

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="AdmiralBison"] what defines a quality game?AdmiralBison

yes, but what but what defines popularity?

Lots of people liking something. :P

Seriously though, I don't think one can really put their finger on what defines popularity. Things are popular for all kind of different reasons.

You buy games you want to play. You don't buy games that you don't want to play. Sales show you what people really think about a game.Senor_Kami

Not really. It doesn't show what people think about a game. It really just shows an imperfect picture of thepopulace's level of interest in a game. Advertising and what not plays a huge part in this.

I am trying to show that sales of hardware and software arent defined by by quality. So the direct and proportional relation of both are not true and is a mistake so big, that I even question the people real motives for it.

I used the fact that pirate avaibility, trend of someone friend, marketing, accessibility to show cases of where this relation can be hugely compromised.

Some fanboys arguments are not even getting near rebutting my idea.

....

Now i should adress the trivial argument of some that because sales is mesurement of popular, the indirect relation of popularity and quality is enough to warranty as valid argument:

ME) Most because of the acessebility factor and some other arguments I already mentioned, this becomes a false statement entirely as becomes impossible to measure how much deep is the indirect relation for each specific case (gameor hardware) since depens is so many factor and context.

......

Now is adress the people that say tha quality is a subjective matter and so there is not perfect way to measure:

ME) agreed. Having a perfect mesurement when we are talking of people opinion, art and einterteament is impossible. But all this forum revolves around this debate and trying to come with more better models to represent better the of quality discrepancy in our human opinion of games.

Even not being possible to come with a perfect model, is possible to try create a model that tries to have the better margin of error and that better represent the reality. The "reviewing scores and metacritic" models whiled flawed is miles better than the "sales porportionality" models.

.....

Conclusion:

We could try to come with others more reliable models, perhaps using other factors other than gaming sites reviews to create this models.

Feel free to to tell us which models would you think would be better, perhaps a mix of other existing models could be true.

We could weight avaible consumer market share of said console to use sales as mesuremnt. Using the ratio to wight and dimishes the error.

And maybe (sales of software of a genre)/(potential market interested is such genre) ratio could also be aplied to a model, since would try to adress the undergrund, niches genres discrepancy sales.

I dont believe sales should be factored at all but at least this other models try to reduce the errors, something some fanboys didnt even try.

Well let's see.

360 has a library of games of great quality.

Lemmings have the ability to use both sales, and game quality as ownage, so why wouldn't they? It obviously upsets the cows.

Mr_Nordquist

[QUOTE="Mr_Nordquist"]

Well let's see.

360 has a library of games of great quality.

Lemmings have the ability to use both sales, and game quality as ownage, so why wouldn't they? It obviously upsets the cows.

AdmiralBison

360 has a library of games of great quality

true and there are more Cows here then Lemmings. System Wars is almost the opposite the real world.

PS3 at the moment seems to be the biggest thing here in systemwars but out there it's a different story.

I dont mean this in a bad way, but saying that the "360 has a library of games of great quality" and not mentioning the PS3 is being 100% biased... True the 360 has great games but the PS3 "has a library of games of great quality" also. Just because you don't like a game, or cant play it on your consol doesnt mean its not a good game. For example, I owned and played halo 3 and can honestly say I dont like it, but that doesnt make it a bad game.

[QUOTE="AdmiralBison"]

[QUOTE="Mr_Nordquist"]

Well let's see.

360 has a library of games of great quality.

Lemmings have the ability to use both sales, and game quality as ownage, so why wouldn't they? It obviously upsets the cows.

Grouchy187

360 has a library of games of great quality

true and there are more Cows here then Lemmings. System Wars is almost the opposite the real world.

PS3 at the moment seems to be the biggest thing here in systemwars but out there it's a different story.

I dont mean this in a bad way, but saying that the "360 has a library of games of great quality" and not mentioning the PS3 is being 100% biased... True the 360 has great games but the PS3 "has a library of games of great quality" also. Just because you don't like a game, or cant play it on your consol doesnt mean its not a good game. For example, I owned and played halo 3 and can honestly say I dont like it, but that doesnt make it a bad game.

The xbox360 has a library of good games. -obviously they wouldn't sell.

Just because I didn't mention the PS3 doesn't mean that it's true or false.

Anyway I have a PS3

[QUOTE="Mr_Nordquist"]

Well let's see.

360 has a library of games of great quality.

Lemmings have the ability to use both sales, and game quality as ownage, so why wouldn't they? It obviously upsets the cows.

AdmiralBison

true and there are more Cows here then Lemmings. System Wars is almost the opposite the real world.

PS3 at the moment seems to be the biggest thing here in systemwars but out there it's a different story.

Thsi is one of the best comments I've seen made on here. Very true

Because fun factor is subjective and completely opinion based.

Because sales are the reason I can't play Psychonauts 2 or Zack&Wiki 2

They indirectly affect us. Low hardware sales aren't going to please developers, so they'll look elsewhere.

They indirectly affect us. Low hardware sales aren't going to please developers, so they'll look elsewhere.

dracula_16

The ps3 is the one getting most investment from of software.
so developers seem to agree with me.
The most expensive games of this generation have been on ps3.
And now the ps3 is getting even more support from thrid party than 360.
Tales of vesperia and nija gaiden 2 coming better on ps3.
No more capcom/SE/take two timed exclusives for 360.
And SE doing a exclusive mmorpg for ps3. Kojima productions still keeping exclusive support for ps3.
Sega with valkirya cronicles and yakuza.
namco with more games in production for ps3. Capcom rumored also.

Only games now exclusive for 360 are PUBLISHED by microsoft, and as we know, microsoft has a very small lineup for the future from what was revealed.

And what good is hardware sales if some are hacked hardware or red ring replacement, At least for the 3rd party perspective is awefull.

REMEMBER:

ONLY WAY A DEVELOPER CAN GARANTEE THAT ONLY LEGAL HOLDER OF OFFICIAL GAME WILL BE ABLE TO ENJOY HIS WORK IS BY DOING PS3 EXCLSUIVE. In the whole history of the gameing industry this is the ONLY WAY.(for now at least)

[QUOTE="Mr_Nordquist"]

Well let's see.

360 has a library of games of great quality.

Lemmings have the ability to use both sales, and game quality as ownage, so why wouldn't they? It obviously upsets the cows.

djsifer01

K, yet currently there's still more critically acclaimed titles on the 360, so yeah.

It's not like lemmings only use sales, but because they can they will. That's all I'm saying. PS3 has games + no sales, 360 has games + sales therefore giving lemmings more stuff to use against cows. Simple as that.