What's the deal with using sales in discussion?

#11brutalhitsPosted 11/25/2013 2:42:26 AM
fuzi11 posted...
brutalhits posted...
The gamecube was one of the best consoles >.< Better than the PS2 that sold extremely well in my opinion. The gamecube has a lot more games that age well, the PS2 every game on there has basically been replaced with a better game for PS3. (With the exception of final fantasy...but lets not talk about that..)


not really, I only had like 6 gamecube games. And I pretty much only played Smash Bros on it. I had much more games (and fun?) with SNES, N64, Wii, and currently Wii U, GB and 3DS. If it weren't for Smash I wouldn't even have owned one.


Obviously you were oblivious to what was available on the gamecube?
#12brutalhitsPosted 11/25/2013 2:52:55 AM
darkjedilink posted...
SpongeBob_SP posted...
Fanboys probably use sales numbers as an objective confirmation of the 'superiority' of their system of choice. Arguments over which system is better are completely illogical, due to the subjective nature of the hobby.

Close, but not quite.

Until recently, sales numbers determined the de-facto winner of a console generation. NES won, because it outsold all competitors. SNES won, because it outsold all competitors. PS1 won, because it outsold all competitors. PS2 won, because it outsold all competitors. It isn't until the Wii won that things changed.

You see, the PS3 fanboys were riding high after Sony winning two straight console generations, and winning them handily. They were CERTAIN that, with the PS3 being (at least on paper) the most powerful console available, they'd be able to keep riding that wave of success. When they not only ended up relegated to dead last in the gen, it was a huge kick in the teeth. Not just that, though - oh, no! They were beat by the Wii, which wasn't much more than an slightly upgraded GameCube! That just DESTROYED everything that made them believe in the PS3 to begin with!

On top of that, the 360, a console that (again, on paper) wasn't as powerful as the PS3 HAD SO MANY BETTER-LOOKING GAMES. Almost every third-party multiplat released on the two consoles was clearly superior on the 360.

All of this led Sony fanboys to try and change the definition of how a console won a generation. All of a sudden, they started talking about "shovelware," even though the PS2 had significantly more of it (which they flat-out denied or ignored), Or they'd bring up McDonalds or Justin Bieber, to try and kill the sales argument THEY SUPPORTED FOR TWO WHOLE GENERATIONS, and which they still use NOW, trying to claim that the PS4 or Xbox One is better because of their launch sales (ignoring the fact that launch sales for the Wii U were about the same).


PS3 caught up to 360 in the end, and ... I wasn't crazy about the Wii no, it was marketed towards little children (I'm not talking about the nintendo licensed games, but I remember seeing a huge wall of games like dora the explorer and what not) and well housewives who did stuff like wii fit on it. Now it still had good actual games, not as many as the PS3 though (or even 360).

The Wii technically couldn't really win the "gaming console" race, because it changed their demographic. So many non-gamers bought one.. Besides most of their games are unique anyway so in terms of actual hardware the real battle was more between 360 and PS3, because they shared a lot of cross platform games, way more than the Wii.

I still enjoyed some games on the Wii but did not care for its controls, the classic controller/pro would've been alright if you didn't have to plug it into your wii mote though..and it had far less interesting games to offer than the PS3 in my opinion.

Anyway I don't really understand why you are so angry, or concerned, whatever it is you are. Whether or not people are a fan of Sony or not. And so eager to label people. As if anyone defending the PS is automatically a fan simply because they're a mindless Sony fanboy. I was with Gamecube before, with PS1 before that, before that SNES and NES. This gen I think PS3 made the best gaming console. And in the coming gen..I'll probably favor Wii U simply because I'm against charging for online multiplayer that PS4 is doing.
#13Neo_HeartlessPosted 11/25/2013 3:42:25 AM
brutalhits posted...


PS3 caught up to 360 in the end, and ... I wasn't crazy about the Wii no, it was marketed towards little children (I'm not talking about the nintendo licensed games, but I remember seeing a huge wall of games like dora the explorer and what not) and well housewives who did stuff like wii fit on it. Now it still had good actual games, not as many as the PS3 though (or even 360).

The Wii technically couldn't really win the "gaming console" race, because it changed their demographic. So many non-gamers bought one.. Besides most of their games are unique anyway so in terms of actual hardware the real battle was more between 360 and PS3, because they shared a lot of cross platform games, way more than the Wii.

I still enjoyed some games on the Wii but did not care for its controls, the classic controller/pro would've been alright if you didn't have to plug it into your wii mote though..and it had far less interesting games to offer than the PS3 in my opinion.

Anyway I don't really understand why you are so angry, or concerned, whatever it is you are. Whether or not people are a fan of Sony or not. And so eager to label people. As if anyone defending the PS is automatically a fan simply because they're a mindless Sony fanboy. I was with Gamecube before, with PS1 before that, before that SNES and NES. This gen I think PS3 made the best gaming console. And in the coming gen..I'll probably favor Wii U simply because I'm against charging for online multiplayer that PS4 is doing.


Your post is kinda what the guy you quoted was talking about. For whatever reason, people are determined to make the Wii be not relevant, like its sales didn't matter. And yet those same people will shamelessly point out WiiU sales, or lack thereof. You cannot really have one without the other.

Also, Nintendo didn't so much change the demographic as they did steal it from Sony. How soon we forget that those shovelware games which lined the Wii's shelves appeared on the PS2? How many Singstar games did Sony release? How many Buzz games with its little remote? The Eyetoy?

The difference, and I'll admit this, is that Sony had a lot of third parties with mainstream appeal too. GTA, Medal of Honor etc all helped cement it as the console of choice and you'll find that no one apart from the most jaded of fanboys will say differently.

So what makes the Wii suddenly different? It had Sales, it had shovelware, and while its games weren't quite as mainstream, it still had its own versions of things like CoD and a fair selection of 1st and 3rd party games. It had Netflix and BBCiPlayer or Hulu/whatever American's had in place of a DVD drive. It was a console in all senses of the word, and yet its irrelevant? It really just sounds like the whining of analblasted fanboys and it really doesn't need to be so, because the PS3 and 360 were still solid consoles and while they did things differently, the end product was still there to play video games.

Can I just say to finish up, and this is nothing against you, but I find it laughable that you mention how the real fight was between the PS3 and 360 because of the multiplats yet we're constantly reminded how Nintendo has always lacked 3rd party support and the sales of the Gamecube and N64 were atrocious and how Sony won those generations. Once again, the double standards in these arguments are astounding and it all stems from people needing to validate their purchases.
---
[Wubeth Intensifies]
#14darkjedilinkPosted 11/25/2013 3:45:09 AM
brutalhits posted...
PS3 caught up to 360 in the end, and ... I wasn't crazy about the Wii no, it was marketed towards little children (I'm not talking about the nintendo licensed games, but I remember seeing a huge wall of games like dora the explorer and what not) and well housewives who did stuff like wii fit on it. Now it still had good actual games, not as many as the PS3 though (or even 360).

The Wii technically couldn't really win the "gaming console" race, because it changed their demographic. So many non-gamers bought one.. Besides most of their games are unique anyway so in terms of actual hardware the real battle was more between 360 and PS3, because they shared a lot of cross platform games, way more than the Wii.

I still enjoyed some games on the Wii but did not care for its controls, the classic controller/pro would've been alright if you didn't have to plug it into your wii mote though..and it had far less interesting games to offer than the PS3 in my opinion.

And none of this is relevant in any way, shape or form. Whether Nintendo didn't have a lot of hardcore games or was bought by a lot of hardcore gamers doesn't change the fact that it sold the most consoles last gen, by a signficant margin, and that is what makes it the winner of last generation. Units sold has ALWAYS determined the winner of a generation.

Anyway I don't really understand why you are so angry, or concerned, whatever it is you are. Whether or not people are a fan of Sony or not. And so eager to label people. As if anyone defending the PS is automatically a fan simply because they're a mindless Sony fanboy. I was with Gamecube before, with PS1 before that, before that SNES and NES. This gen I think PS3 made the best gaming console. And in the coming gen..I'll probably favor Wii U simply because I'm against charging for online multiplayer that PS4 is doing.

Who said I was angry? I was pointing out facts. I don't know or care if said facts apply to you, so I must question why you're getting all defensive about facts that have been demonstrated by Sony fans on this board since its creation and around the world, to the point that if Sony loses exclusivity of a title, within hours the head of that company has fifty death threats.
---
Gaming is like a pair of boobs - Sony and Microsoft fight over whos boobs look more realistic, while Nintendo is about having fun with them - Walkiethrougie
#15Shadowbird_RHPosted 11/25/2013 3:57:09 AM
Wii outselling PS3 and 360 hit Sony and MS fans in the ego. Of course sales will be the first thing they hang over the heads of gamers who enjoy Nintendo consoles with Wii U not being the runaway success that the Wii was.
---
Surrender and I will destroy you peacefully.
R.E.G.I.S. mk5 - Megas XLR
#16brutalhitsPosted 11/25/2013 3:58:11 AM(edited)
@ Darkjedilink
You seem reaaaally eager to declare Wii the winner though, without any actual responses to my arguments as to why the wii doesn't qualify. It may have sold the most, but as a gaming console it didn't win. It won as a household console or whatever. but as a gaming console I would say not.

@ Neo
Do you see me point out the Wii U sales? No.. I wasn't even talking about that at all.

And wow there's a lot to respond to here

"Once again, the double standards in these arguments are astounding and it all stems from people needing to validate their purchases."

I bought a 360 and PS3 and Wii. What am I validating here first of all?

Either way, what makes the Wii different? The fact that the main controller is a wii mote. Instead of a controller made for regular gaming, they went for making one for multi-purposes.
#17Neo_HeartlessPosted 11/25/2013 4:34:02 AM
brutalhits posted...


@ Neo
Do you see me point out the Wii U sales? No.. I wasn't even talking about that at all.

And wow there's a lot to respond to here

"Once again, the double standards in these arguments are astounding and it all stems from people needing to validate their purchases."

I bought a 360 and PS3 and Wii. What am I validating here first of all?

Either way, what makes the Wii different? The fact that the main controller is a wii mote. Instead of a controller made for regular gaming, they went for making one for multi-purposes.


I know you didn't point out the WiiU sales, but the whole point of this topic was about why sales have suddenly become the buzzword to use in arguments. I mean, we constantly being told (not by you, but by others) that the WiiU doesn't count, that it's not on par with the Ps4 or Xbone. Fanboys say it's not competing with them, yet despite all this sales numbers are constantly brought up, compared to all the other consoles. See that later part is the most important fact. Pointing out that the WiiU isn't selling well is a valid argument, but people compare it to all the other consoles, which they think its competition... but apparently it's not? Why is this valid but the Wii's sales aren't? (unless we're comparing the WiiU's sales to the Wiis it seems).

What you need to validate is this stance of yours. As an idort, you really should be above such arguments, yet you seem determined to write the Wii off as irrelevant.

Your last point is completely irrelevant as well. What does the Wiimote have to do with anything? It's multi-purpose? What? So was the PS3 controller with Six-Axis. So is the PS4 controller with the touch pad and gyro options. I'm utterly failing to see the point you were trying to make and I have this feeling its because there wasn't one.
---
[Wubeth Intensifies]
#18brutalhitsPosted 11/25/2013 4:38:24 AM
Neo_Heartless posted...
brutalhits posted...


@ Neo
Do you see me point out the Wii U sales? No.. I wasn't even talking about that at all.

And wow there's a lot to respond to here

"Once again, the double standards in these arguments are astounding and it all stems from people needing to validate their purchases."

I bought a 360 and PS3 and Wii. What am I validating here first of all?

Either way, what makes the Wii different? The fact that the main controller is a wii mote. Instead of a controller made for regular gaming, they went for making one for multi-purposes.


I know you didn't point out the WiiU sales, but the whole point of this topic was about why sales have suddenly become the buzzword to use in arguments. I mean, we constantly being told (not by you, but by others) that the WiiU doesn't count, that it's not on par with the Ps4 or Xbone. Fanboys say it's not competing with them, yet despite all this sales numbers are constantly brought up, compared to all the other consoles. See that later part is the most important fact. Pointing out that the WiiU isn't selling well is a valid argument, but people compare it to all the other consoles, which they think its competition... but apparently it's not? Why is this valid but the Wii's sales aren't? (unless we're comparing the WiiU's sales to the Wiis it seems).

What you need to validate is this stance of yours. As an idort, you really should be above such arguments, yet you seem determined to write the Wii off as irrelevant.

Your last point is completely irrelevant as well. What does the Wiimote have to do with anything? It's multi-purpose? What? So was the PS3 controller with Six-Axis. So is the PS4 controller with the touch pad and gyro options. I'm utterly failing to see the point you were trying to make and I have this feeling its because there wasn't one.


I consider Wii U the competition of PS3/360 as well as X1 and PS4. The Wii's sales arent comparable because the vast majority of its library arent exactly games, or at least not adult or teen games.

I'm not writing the Wii off as irrelevant at all. There's a big difference between saying it's not on the same level as PS3 and 360 and saying it's irrelevant. It's just not the same category.

The wiimote is a really extreme change from the gamecube controller, whereas the PS3 controller may have six-axis, it didn't make the controller any less comfortable, in fact it just became wireless pretty much compared to the wired PS2 controller.
#19brutalhitsPosted 11/25/2013 4:43:26 AM
Anyway my point about the wiimote is that its not designed to play games with in a traditional way first, its designed with motion controls in mind first, then maybe to be used as a remote second, then third they were like errr why not hold it sideways that makes for an ok controller right guys? guys...?
#20Neo_HeartlessPosted 11/25/2013 5:21:11 AM
brutalhits posted...
Anyway my point about the wiimote is that its not designed to play games with in a traditional way first, its designed with motion controls in mind first, then maybe to be used as a remote second, then third they were like errr why not hold it sideways that makes for an ok controller right guys? guys...?


It still really seems like you're clutching at straws here in a desperate attempt to write off the Wii. Most of the games that used it weren't exactly games that couldn't be played normally. Even Wii Sports was all games that could have used traditional controls. The motion controls were there as a mean to make the games seem more immersive. Yes, mostly to appeal to that casual audience but also in an attempt to stand out.

Even then, many of the first party core games like Super Mario Galaxy only required little more than the flick of a wrist and it offends me that people find this too hard. Have we really gotten so lazy? I understand its not everyone's cup of tea, but there's a lot of gamers out there who prefer keyboard and mouse to Gamepad, and we don't just write off one because of the other.
---
[Wubeth Intensifies]