177 réponses à ce sujet

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

You also have no proof the other is around 60% off in this case. Like said wild assumptions trying to push your own agenda.

0.61 = 1.3 / 2.14

Basically, you're telling me you want to believe the VGC data because it's higher.

This is what the dude from VGC said about their European estimates:

"Firstly, Walton freely admits the numbers were based on zero actual data for the entire European market, just pure extrapolation."

Their estimates sound really good...

I didn't say that. Again assumption and wrong interpretation by you.

Secondly the situation he talked about was one title from the past, not this one. Again cherry picking and leaving out context to paint a false picture. Something you do so well but hide so badly.

I wanted to make sure you didn't have an opinion if VGC or NPD is better. You blow in the wind. 

I don't see Microsoft using VGC data in their statement even though it would have been a higher number. Kinda makes you wonder about VGC, right?

Anyone can read the article and form their own conclusions. NPD is better.

Modifié par kbct, 13 avril 2012 - 11:40 .

[Dragoonlordz]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

You also have no proof the other is around 60% off in this case. Like said wild assumptions trying to push your own agenda.

0.61 = 1.3 / 2.14

Basically, you're telling me you want to believe the VGC data because it's higher.

This is what the dude from VGC said about their European estimates:

"Firstly, Walton freely admits the numbers were based on zero actual data for the entire European market, just pure extrapolation."

Their estimates sound really good...

I didn't say that. Again assumption and wrong interpretation by you.

Secondly the situation he talked about was one title from the past, not this one. Again cherry picking and leaving out context to paint a false picture. Something you do so well but hide so badly.

I wanted to make sure you didn't have an opinion if VGC or NPD is better. You blow in the wind. 

I don't see Microsoft using VGC data in their statement even though it would have been a higher number. Kinda makes you wonder about VGC, right?

Anyone can read the article and form their own conclusions. NPD is better.

Thats theirs and your choice, it's an opinion, everyone has one. Does not mean it is the right one.

NPD stated the game sold very well, your using their data to say it did not, I guess you claim they are wrong even though you keep trying to push them as doom and gloom for Bioware and more reliable though they stated was good numbers for the title. One of the other pick one. Either they are right or they are wrong or in fact remain hypocritical about it, your choice.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 13 avril 2012 - 11:46 .

[Zmidponk]

Frankly, I find these discussions about sales figures pointless. You know why? One thing that EA is good at is marketing, even when the game itself is a complete turd. If a game is marketed well, it generally sells very well to start off, regardless of whether the game is actually good or not. If the game is a complete turd, sales tends to drop like a stone after that initial surge of sales as actual players make it known the game is, indeed, a turd. In the case of Mass Effect 3, the game is actually quite good - just terribly marred by what is reputedly an abysmally crap ending and a few flaws/bugs, some of which are quite bad ones (the face import bug, for example).

[Norman250]

High sales on a second sequel does not mean that the game itself was good. People pre-order now. High sales on a second sequel just means that ME1+ME2 were good.

[karek]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

EHondaMashButton wrote...

Top notch competition there....

controversy sells honestly

i talk on another forum and 15 people went out and bought both me2 and me3 for ps3

some even considered buying me1 for pc because they always ask what is the controversy of the ending about

Apparently not.

ME3 had 900k first day sales and monthly sales of 1.3 million. Do the math.

I find it quite amusing you quote NPD to back up your statement when they use the same technique as VGC to gather their data. Sample of retailers scaled up for approximation. Then again I am not that surprised just like in every single thread thats positive regarding the game you, sly, l00p (though will give l00p credit he never took part that one time) and kbct always pop up trying to dismiss any positive facts or data. Do not mistake my deciding to leave that thread is any indication that you somehow are correct in your replies within it. I simply got tired of bickering with you in there. Now your here trying the same tactics against another positive thread and another person.

Op's data is also NPD. Nice try though.

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

NPD stated the game sold very well, your using their data to say it did not, I guess you claim they are wrong even though you keep trying to push them as doom and gloom for Bioware and more reliable though they stated was good numbers for the title. One of the other pick one. Either they are right or they are wrong or in fact remain hypocritical about it, your choice.

Weren't preorders over 900K? After that, it only sold 400K over the rest of the month? Is that good?

By the way, do you have the link where NPD stated the game sold very well?

I'm not trying to push doom and gloom. I just want to look at the information. If they only sold 1.3 million, that's not good, right? Or is 1.3 million good?

[Dragoonlordz]

karek wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

EHondaMashButton wrote...

Top notch competition there....

controversy sells honestly

i talk on another forum and 15 people went out and bought both me2 and me3 for ps3

some even considered buying me1 for pc because they always ask what is the controversy of the ending about

Apparently not.

ME3 had 900k first day sales and monthly sales of 1.3 million. Do the math.

I find it quite amusing you quote NPD to back up your statement when they use the same technique as VGC to gather their data. Sample of retailers scaled up for approximation. Then again I am not that surprised just like in every single thread thats positive regarding the game you, sly, l00p (though will give l00p credit he never took part that one time) and kbct always pop up trying to dismiss any positive facts or data. Do not mistake my deciding to leave that thread is any indication that you somehow are correct in your replies within it. I simply got tired of bickering with you in there. Now your here trying the same tactics against another positive thread and another person.

Op's data is also NPD. Nice try though.

What try would that be? I said both are estimates and both are listed in this thread, both paint a positive picture.

If you mean nice try by those standards then yes it is nice that I succeeded, thanks. My main point in that individual specific reply is his intention of using their data to imply bad sales when in the very same article from NPD said they thought it was good numbers for the title.

[kbct]

Norman250 wrote...

High sales on a second sequel does not mean that the game itself was good. People pre-order now. High sales on a second sequel just means that ME1+ME2 were good.

Agreed.

[Dragoonlordz]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

NPD stated the game sold very well, your using their data to say it did not, I guess you claim they are wrong even though you keep trying to push them as doom and gloom for Bioware and more reliable though they stated was good numbers for the title. One of the other pick one. Either they are right or they are wrong or in fact remain hypocritical about it, your choice.

Weren't preorders over 900K? After that, it only sold 400K over the rest of the month? Is that good?

By the way, do you have the link where NPD stated the game sold very well?

I'm not trying to push doom and gloom. I just want to look at the information. If they only sold 1.3 million, that's not good, right? Or is 1.3 million good?

First post link provided, surprised you missed it.

Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010.

[Dragoonlordz]

Norman250 wrote...

High sales on a second sequel does not mean that the game itself was good. People pre-order now. High sales on a second sequel just means that ME1+ME2 were good.

High sales for March is high sales for March, it does not matter why it is high as long as it is high. There is no evidence for April yet because we are in April. It is random assumption without data for future sales, in that regard it is pointless because it is not yet known.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 14 avril 2012 - 12:00 .

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

NPD stated the game sold very well, your using their data to say it did not, I guess you claim they are wrong even though you keep trying to push them as doom and gloom for Bioware and more reliable though they stated was good numbers for the title. One of the other pick one. Either they are right or they are wrong or in fact remain hypocritical about it, your choice.

Weren't preorders over 900K? After that, it only sold 400K over the rest of the month? Is that good?

By the way, do you have the link where NPD stated the game sold very well?

I'm not trying to push doom and gloom. I just want to look at the information. If they only sold 1.3 million, that's not good, right? Or is 1.3 million good?

First post link provided, surprised you missed it.

Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010.

That's not a link nor was it a qualitative statement. It was a simple statement of fact. You interpreted it to mean the game sold very well. Typical.

Modifié par kbct, 14 avril 2012 - 12:10 .

[Oldbones2]

Blood-Lord Thanatos wrote...

nice. It beat call of duty. thanks for the links, Tazz.

Yeah, it beat a 4 month old game in a monthly sales total.

That's like bragging about beating up a twelve year old. 

[Dragoonlordz]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

NPD stated the game sold very well, your using their data to say it did not, I guess you claim they are wrong even though you keep trying to push them as doom and gloom for Bioware and more reliable though they stated was good numbers for the title. One of the other pick one. Either they are right or they are wrong or in fact remain hypocritical about it, your choice.

Weren't preorders over 900K? After that, it only sold 400K over the rest of the month? Is that good?

By the way, do you have the link where NPD stated the game sold very well?

I'm not trying to push doom and gloom. I just want to look at the information. If they only sold 1.3 million, that's not good, right? Or is 1.3 million good?

First post link provided, surprised you missed it.

Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010.

That's not a link nor was it a qualitative statement. It was a simple statement of fact.

The link is in the first post, I told you where it was. I posted an element which refered to, if you wish to cry over semantics thats your problem.

Double the sales of the previous title is good, or are you going to start screaming about how it's not good unless it's three times the amount or ten times the amount? Doesn't matter in the end, your free to nit pick and try to misrepresent that data anyways you like as I plan on going to do something more productive for a while. If you continue to spread misinformation and use distraction tactics I will be back later to correct your assumptions and false statements but in the meantime have fun.

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Double the sales of the previous title is good, or are you going to start screaming about how it's not good unless it's three times the amount or ten times the amount?

That's your interpetation of the statement. This is what was said:

""Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010."

This is your interpretation:

"NPD stated the game sold very well,"

Do you see the difference? NPD didn't say what you say they said. You always spin everything so ME3 looks great.

I want to look at the best information available and consider all the variables.

You want to look at VGC sales estimates in a static world without production costs or sales targets and make silly statements.

Modifié par kbct, 14 avril 2012 - 12:19 .

[Zmidponk]

Hmm. I'm kinda wondering what NPD mean by ME2s 'introductory month in January 2010'. Do they mean how many copies had sold by the end of January, or a month, beginning on ME2 release day, which was in January? I ask, because, if they mean 'how many had sold by the end of January', as ME2 was released January 26th, that's five days, so they're comparing the first 24 days sales of ME3 with the first 5 days sales of ME2.

EDIT:I should also point out that ME2 was only on PC and 360, when first released, so they're also comparing sales of ME2 on two formats with sales of ME3 on three.

Modifié par Zmidponk, 14 avril 2012 - 12:27 .

[hex23]

For the 1000th time, neither NPD nor VGChartz are accurate.

Unless you get the numbers directly from Bioware or EA you aren't going to get an accurate amount.

[kbct]

Zmidponk wrote...

Hmm. I'm kinda wondering what NPD mean by ME2s 'introductory month in January 2010'. Do they mean how many copies had sold by the end of January, or a month, beginning on ME2 release day, which was in January? I ask, because, if they mean 'how many had sold by the end of January', as ME2 was released January 26th, that's five days, so they're comparing the first 24 days sales of ME3 with the first 5 days sales of ME2.

First four weeks.

[kbct]

hex23 wrote...

For the 1000th time, neither NPD nor VGChartz are accurate.

Unless you get the numbers directly from Bioware or EA you aren't going to get an accurate amount.

Obviously. They're estimates. But NPD is more highly regarded. That's why Aaron Greenberg from Microsoft quoted NPD estimates - not VGC estimates which were higher and released eariler.

[Dragoonlordz]

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Double the sales of the previous title is good, or are you going to start screaming about how it's not good unless it's three times the amount or ten times the amount?

That's your interpetation of the statement. This is what was said:

""Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010."

This is your interpretation:

"NPD stated the game sold very well,"

Do you see the difference? NPD didn't say what you say they said. You always spin everything so ME3 looks great.

I want to look at the best information available and consider all the variables.

You want to look at VGC sales estimates in a static world without production costs or sales targets and make silly statements.

While exact sales numbers have not been made publicly available, NPD analyst Anita Frazier notes that "Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010.

She is someone with knowledge and experience in understanding NPD data, far more than yourself.

Keep trying to paint your picture, convince yourself of whatever it is you wish. I'm off. Only reason I replied this time prior to heading out was due to checking status of this thread after leaving another conversation somewhere else.

To be continued... When I get back.

[kbct]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

kbct wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Double the sales of the previous title is good, or are you going to start screaming about how it's not good unless it's three times the amount or ten times the amount?

That's your interpetation of the statement. This is what was said:

""Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010."

This is your interpretation:

"NPD stated the game sold very well,"

Do you see the difference? NPD didn't say what you say they said. You always spin everything so ME3 looks great.

I want to look at the best information available and consider all the variables.

You want to look at VGC sales estimates in a static world without production costs or sales targets and make silly statements.

While exact sales numbers have not been made publicly available, NPD analyst Anita Frazier notes that "Mass Effect 3 sold more than twice as much as did Mass Effect 2 during its introductory month in January 2010.

She is someone with knowledge and experience in understanding NPD data, far more than yourself.

Sigh. Please reread my post. "Sold very well" is your interpretation.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Zmidponk wrote...

Hmm. I'm kinda wondering what NPD mean by ME2s 'introductory month in January 2010'. Do they mean how many copies had sold by the end of January, or a month, beginning on ME2 release day, which was in January? I ask, because, if they mean 'how many had sold by the end of January', as ME2 was released January 26th, that's five days, so they're comparing the first 24 days sales of ME3 with the first 5 days sales of ME2.

EDIT:I should also point out that ME2 was only on PC and 360, when first released, so they're also comparing sales of ME2 on two formats with sales of ME3 on three.

Hmm, that's actually a good point.

[hex23]

kbct wrote...

Obviously. They're estimates. But NPD is more highly regarded. That's why Aaron Greenberg from Microsoft quoted NPD estimates - not VGC estimates which were higher and released eariler.

Neither is "highly regarded". One is slightly less inaccurate. To put it into perspective NPD just started counting sales from Wal-Mart in February of this year. Keep in mind Wal-Mart is the biggest retailer in America, and it was never even taken into account until less than 2 months ago. Nor do they count digital sales from anywhere.

This is why threads like this are retarded. People are arguing over guesses. Educated guesses, but guesses nonetheless.

[Vasarkian]

Just an FYI, TOR has also proven to not be the story-mmo we were promised, and in that regard that's 3 games that have been released with false promises.

[bleachorange]

Tazzmission wrote...

 
goty confirmed imo



The NPD Group has revealed the top ten best selling games in the United States for the month of March. 

The best selling titles of the month, in order, are: 

1. Mass Effect 3 (360, PS3, PC)** 
2. Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City (360, PS3)** 
3. MLB 12: The Show (PS3, Vita) 
4. NBA 2K12 (360, PS3, Wii, PSP, PC, PS2) 
5. SSX (360, PS3) 
6. Street Fighter x Tekken (360, PS3)** 
7. Mario Party 9 (Wii) 
8. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (360, PS3, Wii, PC)** 
9. Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm Generations(360, PS3) 
10. Major League Baseball 2K12 (360, PS3, Wii, NDS, PSP, PC, PS2) 



http://games.ign.com.../1222926p1.html

It's a bit early yet.:bandit:Why don't you wait until August at the very least? Saying it's all wrapped up 1/3 of the way through smacks of politicking.