Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Video Game Sales Numbers 3: We

24567100

Posts

  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Spoit wrote: »
    On a slight tangent, does anyone think that the sales boost from Halo 3 will be enough to put the hardware sales for the 360 back ahead of the Wii?

    For a month until Mario comes out, sure.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • XagarathXagarath Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything.

    You could not be more wrong.

    You have no way of backing up that statement.
    Because it's wrong.


    Hell, EA edited it to make themselves look better.

  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything. [citation needed]

  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything.

    You could not be more wrong.

    You have no way of backing up that statement.
    Because it's wrong.


    Hell, EA edited it to make themselves look better.

    Ok, so you have shown example of one article which is unreliable out of nearly 2 million.

    Do you fully understand the sheer amount of articles based on science, chemistry, history and whatnot that are 100% factually accurate. They account for well over half of all wikipedia articles.

    What you SHOULD have said to not be wrong is 'Take all wikipedia articles with a grain of salt' because while ostensibly they are accurate they could be altered.

    saying wikipedia is unreliable on everything is stupid and naive.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • Inglorious CoyoteInglorious Coyote Registered User
    edited September 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything.

    You could not be more wrong.

    You have no way of backing up that statement.
    Because it's wrong.


    Hell, EA edited it to make themselves look better.
    And got found out rather quickly.

    Yes, anyone can edit Wiki. And anyone can re-edit Wiki to fix the biased crap that appears, which is what those anal folks who police wiki do.

  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    LewieP wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything. [citation needed]

    Could not have said it better. <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

    scarab you have mental problems
  • chasmchasm Ill-tempered Texan Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Didn't some independent group find that Wikipedia is no less accurate than the average encyclopedia?

    XBL : lJesse Custerl | PSN : lJesseCusterl | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    LewieP wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything. [citation needed]

    Could not have said it better. <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

    hmm, this might have been better

  • Inglorious CoyoteInglorious Coyote Registered User
    edited September 2007
    chasm wrote: »
    Didn't some independent group find that Wikipedia is no less accurate than the average encyclopedia?
    They found that it has less errors on average than the Encyclopedia Brittanica.

  • LeitnerLeitner Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Leitner wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything.

    Welcome to any encyclopedia ever. It's links, however, do tend to be reliable.

    Other encyclopedias are not editable by anyone with an internet connection.

    Which is why I'll use wikipedia over a standard encyclopedia any day of the week.

    p.s. Wikipedia has been found in various studies to be as reliable facts wise as print encyclpedias, averaging the same number of errors in various samples.

  • PureauthorPureauthor Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    First off:

    You people who insist on denying that Wikipedia holds any worth whatsoever, have you people actually visited it within the past... I dunno, ever? While anyone can edit it and mess it up, this also means that (SHOCK!) anyone can edit it back to make it correct again! Not to mention the people dedicating to fixing the site's info would see it as more of a job than some pastime, and so would be more persistent in fixing the site than some obnoxious preteen who wants to insist that Martin Luther King Jr. had three heads. (Which is a bit of stretch, considering that I'm unsure most preteens know who Martin Luther King Jr. is.)

    Secondly, the large majority of Wikipedia's information is sourced to other sites that are not Wikipedia. And that's why Wikipedia is a godsend - you go to the main page, and you'll generally have links up the wazoo to -gasp!- other pages! That aren't Wikipedia! And may even be reliable! And Wikipedia uses these links and sources for their information!

    Thirdly, Wikipedia has been, in various tests, found to be as accurate, if not moreso, than your average encyclopedia. Perception =/= reality, otherwise the PSP has no games, and the XBox 360 has nothing but shooters.

    Secondly:
    toxk_02 wrote: »
    Mario Strikers just got released in Japan so this week we'll see how far demand is really down or if they're just waiting for games. This depends if Mario Strikers is popular or not, I don't have a clue how the Gamecube predecessor held up.

    Mario Strikers Charged absolutely bombed on first day sales according to the sinobi blog. Maybe it'll pick up over the week, but... enh. Not looking good.

    SS FC: 1334 0950 5927
    Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111
  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I got banned from editing Wikipedia entries for 2 years after changing the article on avalanches, specifically the section on how to survive an avalanche by adding 'Grab hold of yetis dick' yeah that was me and it lasted a few weeks but this was back before wikipedia was anywhere near as moderated as it is now.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • darleysamdarleysam Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    LewieP wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    LewieP wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything. [citation needed]

    Could not have said it better. <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

    hmm, this might have been better

    wikipedian_protester.png

  • JimothyJimothy Not in front of the fox he's with the owlRegistered User regular
    edited September 2007
    chasm wrote: »
    Maybe they should release 3 different versions of Halo 3 where each version has different monsters in the campaign that can be traded for with other versions. Or they could give you a limited selection of weapons, and you have to trade for the rest.

    It might get further up the best selling games list.

    I...I think I love you.

    So what are you so afraid of?

    Owlsig.jpg
  • XagarathXagarath Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything.

    You could not be more wrong.

    You have no way of backing up that statement.
    Because it's wrong.


    Hell, EA edited it to make themselves look better.

    Ok, so you have shown example of one article which is unreliable out of nearly 2 million.

    Do you fully understand the sheer amount of articles based on science, chemistry, history and whatnot that are 100% factually accurate. They account for well over half of all wikipedia articles.

    What you SHOULD have said to not be wrong is 'Take all wikipedia articles with a grain of salt' because while ostensibly they are accurate they could be altered.

    saying wikipedia is unreliable on everything is stupid and naive.
    I didn't say it was unreliable on everything. I said it wasn't reliable for anything. There's a clear distinction of meaning.
    Learn to read.

    And for all those rabbiting on about regular encyclopedias by contrast, they don't generally contain things like sales figures at all, not would I rely on them for them if they did.

    By the way, the test referred to showed it was more grammatically accurate than the Enclopedia Britannica online, which was neither a comparison with the (different) print version nor at all relevant to the issue of factual accuracy.

  • PureauthorPureauthor Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    I didn't say it was unreliable on everything. I said it wasn't reliable for anything. There's a clear distinction of meaning.
    Learn to read.

    Apparently I need to learn to read, then. If it's not reliable for Subject (A), (A) being a variable, then by extension it must be unreliable for Subject (A). In the case of 'anything', Subject (A) then covers the entire spectrum, which is, well, everything.

    So what's the clear 'distinction of meaning' here?

    SS FC: 1334 0950 5927
    Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111
  • WickerBasketWickerBasket Registered User
    edited September 2007
    Jimothy wrote: »
    chasm wrote: »
    Maybe they should release 3 different versions of Halo 3 where each version has different monsters in the campaign that can be traded for with other versions. Or they could give you a limited selection of weapons, and you have to trade for the rest.

    It might get further up the best selling games list.

    I...I think I love you.

    So what are you so afraid of?

    The power of love?

    Edit: Also, stop arguing about the reliability of Wikipedia. It's a hell of a lot more reliable than vgchartz and thats all that needs to be said. Games numbers are really hard to comeby outside of the US and Japan, I wouldn't really trust anything other than the NPD and Media Create.

    "please get on point coward baby magets."

    PSN = Wicker86 ________ Gamertag = Wicker86
  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Xagarath wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Xagarath wrote: »
    Wikipedia is not a reliable source for anything.

    You could not be more wrong.

    You have no way of backing up that statement.
    Because it's wrong.


    Hell, EA edited it to make themselves look better.

    Ok, so you have shown example of one article which is unreliable out of nearly 2 million.

    Do you fully understand the sheer amount of articles based on science, chemistry, history and whatnot that are 100% factually accurate. They account for well over half of all wikipedia articles.

    What you SHOULD have said to not be wrong is 'Take all wikipedia articles with a grain of salt' because while ostensibly they are accurate they could be altered.

    saying wikipedia is unreliable on everything is stupid and naive.
    I didn't say it was unreliable on everything. I said it wasn't reliable for anything. There's a clear distinction of meaning.
    Learn to read.

    Nope. Wrong again.

    If you say it is not reliable for anything, that means all wikipedia articles are classed as unreliable. therefore everything is unreliable by virtue of you saying that all wikipedia articles are the opposite of reliable, which is unreliable.

    which is bullshit, because the wikipedia article on ME is accurate. so that shoots down your argument first off. secondly, like i said, you are taking one tiny miniscule fraction of the wikipedia articles, they have thousands, nay, millions of articles which are copied verbatim from textbooks and science journals. Wikipedia, like I said, should always be studied carefully and never used as a primary source for debate, but to say it is all unreliable is plain wrong. wikipedia is a source of a shitton of reliable, concrete evidence on all manner of subjects. sure, SOME articles are unreliable, but nowhere fucking near all.

    dismissing wikipedia are innacurate in the same thread where people are citing vgchartz numbers smacks os insanity. one is clearly orders of magniture more reliable than the other.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • GuekGuek Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    wiki works well as a springboard to other sites and information and a great place to head to if you need some quick facts. That said, even if a lot (I might even venture to say most) of the information there is accurate, you can never assume that it is all accurate. In that sense you really do have to have an air of suspicious when using wiki as a source. That's why it's not accepted as a valid resource in schools and institutions of higher learning. Wiki is awesome and I wholeheartedly support citing it in a relaxed environment such as the PA forums but I would never advise taking it as concrete evidence.

    Anywho, strikers bombed in japan? That's a damn shame. Don't they love soccer over there? Or is that just in Korea? Strikers deserves solid sales...I hope it picks back up.

  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Guek wrote: »
    wiki works well as a springboard to other sites and information and a great place to head to if you need some quick facts. That said, even if a lot (I might even venture to say most) of the information there is accurate, you can never assume that it is all accurate. In that sense you really do have to have an air of suspicious when using wiki as a source. That's why it's not excepted as a valid resource in schools and institutions of higher learning. Wiki is awesome and I wholeheartedly support citing it in a relaxed environment such as the PA forums but I would never advise taking it as concrete evidence.

    Anywho, strikers bombed in japan? That's a damn shame. Don't they love soccer over there? Or is that just in Korea? Strikers deserves solid sales...I hope it picks back up.

    should do really well in europe mind you. we love our football here. nintendo has also done a pretty big marketing push on it. ive seen TV ads. and I NEVER see nintendo tv ads. ever.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • PureauthorPureauthor Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Hasn't it already been out in Europe for a while?

    SS FC: 1334 0950 5927
    Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111
  • ZephyrZephyr Registered User
    edited September 2007
    strikers came out in europe before america

    16kakxt.jpg
  • WybornWyborn GET EQUIPPED Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Anybody got predictions for Galaxies sales?

    I heard it had something like 400k preorders a few weeks ago. Any truth to that?

    Mae77qg.png
    I have a Steam account
    3DS: 2406-5129-4317
  • GuekGuek Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    galaxy with break 1 mil before the end of the year. 2 mil before the end of the 4rth quarter (which ends at the start of Feb or something like that, right?)

  • WickerBasketWickerBasket Registered User
    edited September 2007
    I'm predicting 3 million sold for Galaxy, maybe more since the Wii has no good games.

    "please get on point coward baby magets."

    PSN = Wicker86 ________ Gamertag = Wicker86
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    While nintendo won't have half as much advertising, why do you think that Galaxies won't be half as sucessful as halo? The sales bases are about the same size, and if anything, mario is a stronger brand. I'd say at least 3 mil before the new years.

    camo_sig2.png
  • PureauthorPureauthor Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Halo will get the bigger launch, but I think Galaxy will keep selling for longer.

    SS FC: 1334 0950 5927
    Platinum FC: 2880 3245 5111
  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Guek wrote: »
    galaxy with break 1 mil before the end of the year. 2 mil before the end of the 4rth quarter (which ends at the start of Feb or something like that, right?)

    Im going to guess it will sell less. I think most people are waiting on Brawl over Galaxy. Well I am. Didnt people also predict the same kind of high sales for Prime 3?

    scarab you have mental problems
  • Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I'm predicting 3 million sold for Galaxy, maybe more since the Wii has no good games.

    Yeah...It'll sell more than that. Sunshine did 5 million lifetime, and Wii is quickly going to catch and pass the LTD sales of the Cube.

    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • PataPata Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I'm predicting 3 million sold for Galaxy, maybe more since the Wii has no good games.

    It comes with a good game in the box.

    Spoiler:
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Pata wrote: »
    I'm predicting 3 million sold for Galaxy, maybe more since the Wii has no good games.

    It comes with a good game in the box.

    and tonnes more on the shelves of stores.

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Guek wrote: »
    galaxy with break 1 mil before the end of the year. 2 mil before the end of the 4rth quarter (which ends at the start of Feb or something like that, right?)

    Im going to guess it will sell less. I think most people are waiting on Brawl over Galaxy. Well I am. Didnt people also predict the same kind of high sales for Prime 3?

    Except...all we know is the first 3 days of sales for prime 3, which were good, if not bioshock levels. It'll definately break 1M with the september NPD. And besides that, if any "hardcore" game is going to sell to the casuals, it'd be mario.

    camo_sig2.png
  • WickerBasketWickerBasket Registered User
    edited September 2007
    LewieP wrote: »
    Pata wrote: »
    I'm predicting 3 million sold for Galaxy, maybe more since the Wii has no good games.

    It comes with a good game in the box.

    and tonnes more on the shelves of stores.

    I mean real games, not party games.

    "please get on point coward baby magets."

    PSN = Wicker86 ________ Gamertag = Wicker86
  • Inglorious CoyoteInglorious Coyote Registered User
    edited September 2007
    I fully expect Galaxy to sell at least a couple million by years end, and probably more.

    Though I have a feeling Brawl will outsell it.

  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Spoit wrote: »
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Guek wrote: »
    galaxy with break 1 mil before the end of the year. 2 mil before the end of the 4rth quarter (which ends at the start of Feb or something like that, right?)

    Im going to guess it will sell less. I think most people are waiting on Brawl over Galaxy. Well I am. Didnt people also predict the same kind of high sales for Prime 3?

    Except...all we know is the first 3 days of sales for prime 3, which were good, if not bioshock levels. It'll definately break 1M with the september NPD. And besides that, if any "hardcore" game is going to sell to the casuals, it'd be mario.

    I dont think Prime 3 will break 1 million in the September NPD. People are attributing too much to the August NPD being 'just the first 3 days'

    Big name franchies stack their sales early. for example, Halo 2 had over 2 million sales in the first 3 days.

    Prime 3 is not going to trend as high as it did for those 3 days. You cant just extend those sales for another month at that rate to get over 1 million.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    LewieP wrote: »
    Pata wrote: »
    I'm predicting 3 million sold for Galaxy, maybe more since the Wii has no good games.

    It comes with a good game in the box.

    and tonnes more on the shelves of stores.

    I mean real games, not party games.
    Image:Metroid_Prime_3_Packaging.jpg

    but whatever, this meme is as baseless and as persistant as the "Gamecube is teh kiddy" meme.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • WickerBasketWickerBasket Registered User
    edited September 2007
    Daedalus wrote: »

    but whatever, this meme is as baseless and as persistant as the "Gamecube is teh kiddy" meme.
    It's not a Meme, I'm from Europe. Paper Mario JUST came out. There's nothing worth buying that I haven't played.

    Edit: Also, Zelda wasn't very good.

    "please get on point coward baby magets."

    PSN = Wicker86 ________ Gamertag = Wicker86
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Daedalus wrote: »

    but whatever, this meme is as baseless and as persistant as the "Gamecube is teh kiddy" meme.
    It's not a Meme, I'm from Europe. Paper Mario JUST came out. There's nothing worth buying that I haven't played.

    Edit: Also, Zelda wasn't very good.

    stuff worth buying that you haven't played does not equal no good games.

  • WickerBasketWickerBasket Registered User
    edited September 2007
    Titmouse wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »

    but whatever, this meme is as baseless and as persistant as the "Gamecube is teh kiddy" meme.
    It's not a Meme, I'm from Europe. Paper Mario JUST came out. There's nothing worth buying that I haven't played.

    Edit: Also, Zelda wasn't very good.

    stuff worth buying that you haven't played does not equal no good games.

    I'm aware of that, but of the ones I have played none of them are good. Or they are party games.

    "please get on point coward baby magets."

    PSN = Wicker86 ________ Gamertag = Wicker86
  • PataPata Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    LewieP wrote: »
    Pata wrote: »
    I'm predicting 3 million sold for Galaxy, maybe more since the Wii has no good games.

    It comes with a good game in the box.

    and tonnes more on the shelves of stores.

    I mean real games, not party games.

    Halo non-game confirmed.

    Spoiler:
This discussion has been closed.