the article just said that they weren't competitors! Jesus. Read.
qflulz
he's exactly right.
they are using a linear best fit line for a non-linear model too(they should have used a linear, exponential, and a few poly models to find the one that was actually best fit before posting results).
if you don't agree with these numbers, then prove me wrong.
See the fallacy in your argument now? it's a burden of proof fallacy.
http://www.nizkor.org/featu...
burden of proof lies with the affirmative (article) in this case.
How sales differences compare than a percent sales difference. Just for my own curiosities sake. Some weird things happen with percents that make them alone hard to take in context. It doesn't really take into account total games sold yearly have been increasing.
For example. if the ratio in 2007 were 5:1 for a game with 360 selling 500 and PS3 selling 100, then in 2008 the ratio was 3:1, but 360 sold 6 million and PS3 2 million, it doesn't show that the actual difference is bigg...
Actually, only around 10 major people from Rare left. The founders are still with the company though.
They definitely still have a good amount of talent (they have a lot of people on their teams). Nuts and Bolts was a pretty innovative idea, it was just pulled off poorly. They're still making a lot of really good other games like Viva Pinata and Kameo, which were both pretty fun games. Even PDZ, which was slightly disappointing, still was a lot of fun to play in it's online modes...
Every single company in this industry (sans retailers) reports games sold to retailers. Ubi, EA, Activision, Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, everybody.
Do you know why? Because they have no way of tracking the number sold to consumers, and their investors don't really care how many consumers get their product. They care about how much money they are making. They make their money directly from sales to retailers.
And are you really so naive to think that microsoft is the o...
you suck at math.
28-2=26
not 24-25.
Also, does someone have a link to the 21.2 announcement? The last I heard they were on track to sell 10 million in fiscal 08, and they had 12.8 by the end of fiscal 07.
if you count the 500k handycap mint talked about, he/she is actually pretty close to where it should be (as both would end up on or above estimates).
We should know soon because Sony's fiscal ends in a week, and M$ should be r...
NPD is north america. Not just the US. It's a whole continent.
Chart track is working on doing stats for the whole of europe, so by then it should actually be significant. I still don't think Irish charts are really significant, but that doesn't mean they should be banned. There's been worse things posted.
is not as brutal as Condemned, manhunt, or (i'm assuming if this article is out there) god of war 3. The gore in GeoW is almost comic, it's nothing like pulling out someones vertebrae with a pair of surgical clamps or shoving a screwdriver through someone's eye.
It's not always what happens either. A big part is how it's shown.
It was closer to $700-800:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/new...
The estimate he uses is before the system even had it's final specs released.
when people take a quote out of context, then people write an article taking an out of context quote out of context.
But US sales will probably go to 360. There's just a lot more 360's here, and FF is the kind of game that would probably sell well on both platforms.
PS3 might have a higher adoption percent, but with more than an 8 million console lead in NA, it definitely gives a big advantage.
Why do developers continue to insist that brutal will make a game better. I actually disliked Condemned/2 and Manhunt 2 because they were so brutal. Some things you just don't have to show to get the idea of. I just don't get the draw to brutal-for-the-sake-of-brutal games.
Why do they call it MT 2.0 if it's obviously an enhanced version of the original engine? Why not follow the same naming conventions that software programs have been following and make it 2.1?
/confusion
He gets quoted out of context more than anyone in the industry.
Sony's dropping YoY sales in both PS2 and PS3. That is bad. In what world is that good? He didn't even say the words "Hemorrhaging At Retail" himself; he just passed on a quote.
You can use statistics to prove both sides of any argument. It just comes down to which statistic is actually more important.
what's better? More good games, a lot more ok games, and even more games in general, or a higher percentage of good and ok games. You can choose whatever you like.
which would you rather have. 50% of 100 games being good or 60% of 75 games being good?
the old indiana jones game Indiana Jones and the fate of atlantis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
that felt a lot more natural as an indiana jones game than any of the action adventures. Even though I'd tend to think of the films as action/adventure, I think the concept translates better to adventure than action adventure.
Most of the games that were in the XNA trial got picked up as full xbla games though.