The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
We now return to our regularly scheduled PA Forums. Please let me (Hahnsoo1) know if something isn't working. The Holiday Forum will remain up until January 10, 2025.

Video game Sales Numbers! Triforces, Slimes, and Super Mushrooms

13468962

Posts

  • SerpentSerpent Sometimes Vancouver, BC, sometimes Brisbane, QLDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Serpent wrote: »
    1. It can play games. You include these in future revenue from the product, because that results in revenue directly due to the sales of the product. Whether we label it as a high end product or not, it makes money from games. To not include those would be retarded.

    2. If it makes money from games, costs a fuckton, and does a bunch of things other than play games and that the competitors don't (yah i'm reaching a bit here), then it seems appropriate to consider it a high end electronics part.

    I mean shit
    the ps3 costs more than some HDTVs

    that sounds like a high end piece of electronics more than a mass marketed ANYTHING to me!
    Yeah, you really are. That was my point, was that you cant not call it a mass market game machine, because it is being marketed to the masses as that. Sony wants it to be mass market.

    I have no objection to calling the ps3 a luxury electronics item as well as a mass marketed gaming system. But saying it is the first and not the second, just to make its sales look better, is dishonest and inaccurate.

    A piece of equipment that is $600 is not a mass marketed anything. And have you seen the commercials for the thing? it is not being marketed to the masses as a 'mass market' anything. It is being marketed as 'the best thing', 'an expensive thing which willl do everything', 'something which is worth $600'.

    Also, things are not 'luxury items' and 'mass market' items, they are one or the other. A luxury item is something which someone wants simply because of the cost/status/rarity invovled to some extent. luxury items are status symbols -- like a rolax, an HDTV (though this is losing it's luxury status), a cellphone in the early 90s. Expensive cars. Two high end video cards. a 20 inch monitor 3 years ago.

    Look at the Neo-geo -- that was not a mass marketed anything. It was a piece of luxury electornics and it did very well despite selling 'poorly'.

    edit: sidenote, i do not have a ps3 and will not buy one. I have no need for a luxury piece of electronics. I do, however, have a xbox360, and want a wii :(

    Serpent on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aoi wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Aoi wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.


    Yet at the same time, both the PS3 and 360 have marketplaces specifically for smaller developers that don't have the cash or development support of the big boys.

    I admit to not having a 360 or PS3 yet, but aren't most of the games on there rather small and generally inexpensive? There are plenty of smaller developers who make games that are too big for the marketplace or would rather sell them for 50 dollars.

    They're certainly starting out that way, and a good deal of them are ports too. But at the same time, it's been the first year of each respective console, and no one really thought the Arcade was going to take off initially. There are rumors of Sam and Max and other episodic games coming down the line. The PSN had a full Tekken released over the Playstation Network, and Microsoft just upped the max size of their arcade games to 250 mb.
    250 MB seems rather small for most RPGs, longish action games, and anything with a lot of voice acting. I don't think small developers will find the marketplaces that useful. However, I think it will really help the independent developers that normally produce a game and just sell it on the internet.

    Couscous on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Serpent wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Serpent wrote: »
    1. It can play games. You include these in future revenue from the product, because that results in revenue directly due to the sales of the product. Whether we label it as a high end product or not, it makes money from games. To not include those would be retarded.

    2. If it makes money from games, costs a fuckton, and does a bunch of things other than play games and that the competitors don't (yah i'm reaching a bit here), then it seems appropriate to consider it a high end electronics part.

    I mean shit
    the ps3 costs more than some HDTVs

    that sounds like a high end piece of electronics more than a mass marketed ANYTHING to me!
    Yeah, you really are. That was my point, was that you cant not call it a mass market game machine, because it is being marketed to the masses as that. Sony wants it to be mass market.

    I have no objection to calling the ps3 a luxury electronics item as well as a mass marketed gaming system. But saying it is the first and not the second, just to make its sales look better, is dishonest and inaccurate.

    A piece of equipment that is $600 is not a mass marketed anything. And have you seen the commercials for the thing? it is not being marketed to the masses as a 'mass market' anything. It is being marketed as 'the best thing', 'an expensive thing which willl do everything', 'something which is worth $600'.

    Also, things are not 'luxury items' and 'mass market' items, they are one or the other. A luxury item is something which someone wants simply because of the cost/status/rarity invovled to some extent. luxury items are status symbols -- like a rolax, an HDTV (though this is losing it's luxury status), a cellphone in the early 90s. Expensive cars. Two high end video cards. a 20 inch monitor 3 years ago.

    Look at the Neo-geo -- that was not a mass marketed anything. It was a piece of luxury electornics and it did very well despite selling 'poorly'.

    edit: sidenote, i do not have a ps3 and will not buy one. I have no need for a luxury piece of electronics. I do, have a xbox360, and want a wii :(

    You don't spend millions of dollars on advertising a status symbol. The Neo Geo was produced in small amounts for the gamers who wanted games exactly like the ones at the arcade. The PS3 is produced in very large quantities. How many companies produce millions a status symbol? Status symbols are never expected to win a format war.

    Couscous on
  • AoiAoi Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    Aoi wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    Aoi wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.


    Yet at the same time, both the PS3 and 360 have marketplaces specifically for smaller developers that don't have the cash or development support of the big boys.

    I admit to not having a 360 or PS3 yet, but aren't most of the games on there rather small and generally inexpensive? There are plenty of smaller developers who make games that are too big for the marketplace or would rather sell them for 50 dollars.

    They're certainly starting out that way, and a good deal of them are ports too. But at the same time, it's been the first year of each respective console, and no one really thought the Arcade was going to take off initially. There are rumors of Sam and Max and other episodic games coming down the line. The PSN had a full Tekken released over the Playstation Network, and Microsoft just upped the max size of their arcade games to 250 mb.
    250 MB seems rather small for most RPGs, longish action games, and anything with a lot of voice acting. I don't think small developers will find the marketplaces that useful. However, I think it will really help the independent developers that normally produce a game and just sell it on the internet.


    Possibly, though again there was a small budget Tetris title released recently for $30 on the 360, so even with normal media, it's still happening. It's also rumored that the marketplace will be used for episodic content like games such as Sam and Max, which could get past the size limit by releasing the game in parts like they do. Hard to tell which way that's going to go for now though.

    Aoi on
  • AegiesAegies Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    Yeah, seriously. I mean, it's not like there are a bunch of sequels or ports on the Wi- oh, wait. That's right. It's become a home for PS2 and Gamecube ports, and the most anticipated games for the console in reverse order are Metroid Prime 3, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Mario Galaxy.

    Aegies on
    eat. sleep. game.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • HoukHouk Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Serpent wrote: »
    A piece of equipment that is $600 is not a mass marketed anything. And have you seen the commercials for the thing? it is not being marketed to the masses as a 'mass market' anything. It is being marketed as 'the best thing', 'an expensive thing which willl do everything', 'something which is worth $600'.

    Also, things are not 'luxury items' and 'mass market' items, they are one or the other. A luxury item is something which someone wants simply because of the cost/status/rarity invovled to some extent. luxury items are status symbols -- like a rolax, an HDTV (though this is losing it's luxury status), a cellphone in the early 90s. Expensive cars. Two high end video cards. a 20 inch monitor 3 years ago.

    Look at the Neo-geo -- that was not a mass marketed anything. It was a piece of luxury electornics and it did very well despite selling 'poorly'.

    edit: sidenote, i do not have a ps3 and will not buy one. I have no need for a luxury piece of electronics. I do, however, have a xbox360, and want a wii :(
    A car costs well over $600. A car is mass market. There is no set dollar amount that determines 'luxury' vs 'mass'.

    The PS3 ads don't set it apart as a 'luxury'. Those ads with crying dolls set it apart as a 'what the fuck am i looking at' item. they dont present a compelling brand or lifestyle, or however PR would phrase it.

    The thing is, Sony needs as many people as humanly possible to buy a PS3, because they need them to buy games and movies to make any money. Any other 'luxury' item you can name doesn't rely on secondary income for anything. sorry, that dog just wont hunt.

    Houk on
  • SerpentSerpent Sometimes Vancouver, BC, sometimes Brisbane, QLDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    Serpent wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Serpent wrote: »
    1. It can play games. You include these in future revenue from the product, because that results in revenue directly due to the sales of the product. Whether we label it as a high end product or not, it makes money from games. To not include those would be retarded.

    2. If it makes money from games, costs a fuckton, and does a bunch of things other than play games and that the competitors don't (yah i'm reaching a bit here), then it seems appropriate to consider it a high end electronics part.

    I mean shit
    the ps3 costs more than some HDTVs

    that sounds like a high end piece of electronics more than a mass marketed ANYTHING to me!
    Yeah, you really are. That was my point, was that you cant not call it a mass market game machine, because it is being marketed to the masses as that. Sony wants it to be mass market.

    I have no objection to calling the ps3 a luxury electronics item as well as a mass marketed gaming system. But saying it is the first and not the second, just to make its sales look better, is dishonest and inaccurate.

    A piece of equipment that is $600 is not a mass marketed anything. And have you seen the commercials for the thing? it is not being marketed to the masses as a 'mass market' anything. It is being marketed as 'the best thing', 'an expensive thing which willl do everything', 'something which is worth $600'.

    Also, things are not 'luxury items' and 'mass market' items, they are one or the other. A luxury item is something which someone wants simply because of the cost/status/rarity invovled to some extent. luxury items are status symbols -- like a rolax, an HDTV (though this is losing it's luxury status), a cellphone in the early 90s. Expensive cars. Two high end video cards. a 20 inch monitor 3 years ago.

    Look at the Neo-geo -- that was not a mass marketed anything. It was a piece of luxury electornics and it did very well despite selling 'poorly'.

    edit: sidenote, i do not have a ps3 and will not buy one. I have no need for a luxury piece of electronics. I do, have a xbox360, and want a wii :(

    You don't spend millions of dollars on advertising a status symbol. The Neo Geo was produced in small amounts for the gamers who wanted games exactly like the ones at the arcade. The PS3 is produced in very large quantities. How many companies produce millions a status symbol? Status symbols are never expected to win a format war.

    When your product is a status symbol, and the other is unkown, it will very much win you a format war.

    Serpent on
  • jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Accualt wrote: »
    Karf wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?
    Microsoft is making profit off the hardware sales of both the core and the premium, and have been for at least 6 months or more.

    Right but the entire Xbox division isn't turning a profit because of all the debt from R&D and Xbox 1.

    But they aren't losing money on sales of the console itself. Actually they're making a pretty hefty profit (Over $70 per console I believe).

    jungleroomx on
  • ThreepioThreepio New Westminster, BCRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Why is it necessary to "win" a format war? Titles are still being developed for all three platforms, each console has penetration in the millions (after 1.5 years of life for one and half a year of life for the other two).

    The whole notion of a format war makes me shake my head a little. I suppose we all need to belong and it's better than gang warfare, but we take it a bit far sometimes.

    Hell, half the reason I stand up for the system is because I'd like to see all three platforms succeed. Folks on this board in particular have motivated me from casual bystander to system owner to system advocate. I'd rather not see any system fail, flounder, founder or fall.

    I suppose this is derivative of the competitive nature of most gamers that there has to be a "winner". Anything less than utter success can be seen as failure. I suppose Sony has taken the place of "The Last Boss" - the hero of the previous game, now set as the villain. Poetic, really. :D

    Well, that's my morning musing. I've got a meeting. See you in a bit lads.

    Threepio on
    142.jpg
  • WordherderWordherder Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aegies wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    Yeah, seriously. I mean, it's not like there are a bunch of sequels or ports on the Wi- oh, wait. That's right. It's become a home for PS2 and Gamecube ports, and the most anticipated games for the console in reverse order are Metroid Prime 3, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Mario Galaxy.

    Um..... 'kay. What does that have to do with anything I wrote about?

    Wordherder on
    Why the crap did I ever make my original name "cloudeagle?"
  • SerpentSerpent Sometimes Vancouver, BC, sometimes Brisbane, QLDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Serpent wrote: »
    A piece of equipment that is $600 is not a mass marketed anything. And have you seen the commercials for the thing? it is not being marketed to the masses as a 'mass market' anything. It is being marketed as 'the best thing', 'an expensive thing which willl do everything', 'something which is worth $600'.

    Also, things are not 'luxury items' and 'mass market' items, they are one or the other. A luxury item is something which someone wants simply because of the cost/status/rarity invovled to some extent. luxury items are status symbols -- like a rolax, an HDTV (though this is losing it's luxury status), a cellphone in the early 90s. Expensive cars. Two high end video cards. a 20 inch monitor 3 years ago.

    Look at the Neo-geo -- that was not a mass marketed anything. It was a piece of luxury electornics and it did very well despite selling 'poorly'.

    edit: sidenote, i do not have a ps3 and will not buy one. I have no need for a luxury piece of electronics. I do, however, have a xbox360, and want a wii :(
    A car costs well over $600. A car is mass market. There is no set dollar amount that determines 'luxury' vs 'mass'.

    The PS3 ads don't set it apart as a 'luxury'. Those ads with crying dolls set it apart as a 'what the fuck am i looking at' item. they dont present a compelling brand or lifestyle, or however PR would phrase it.

    The thing is, Sony needs as many people as humanly possible to buy a PS3, because they need them to buy games and movies to make any money. Any other 'luxury' item you can name doesn't rely on secondary income for anything. sorry, that dog just wont hunt.

    A car is mass market because of the way our society works -- things are set at luxury prices based on what they do for us, and the ps3 is definately a luxury piece of equipment. laptops cost as much and often more than the ps3, but are not luxury pieces of equipment.... however, 5 years ago, a laptop was a luxury piece of equipment because it's price compared to what it did was quite high.

    Sony needs as many people as humanly possible to buy the ps3 to make the most money, but they need far less than that to have a 'successful' system, and neither you or I know how much that is. Also, Sony doesn't need lots of people to buy the ps3 to make money off movies -- they just need enough to buy it to push blu-ray to suceed (and again, succeed here does not mean replace DVD, it means hit the threshold where they make tons of cash off of it which can be very different. Laserdisc for example was a SUCCESS despite most people on this forum having never seen one, I bet).

    edit: also, luxury items which require other things to make money: laserdisc is the obvious one since I already stated it.

    Serpent on
  • SerpentSerpent Sometimes Vancouver, BC, sometimes Brisbane, QLDRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Something alot of people seem to forget when arguing about 'success' vs 'failure' is the business model that was set up around a product. Success and failure is based on this business model and not any of OUR statements

    If the ps3 was designed and priced in such a way that they expected to sell 130k units in March, then they are doing very well. However, if the ps3 was designed in such a way that they expected to dominate the wii and xbox360....

    I don't think they did it that way. I think the ps3 was designed to push blu-ray first, and I think it's doing damn well at this.

    Serpent on
  • PataPata Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Wait I thought all video game consoles are luxury items?

    Pata on
    SRWWSig.pngEpisode 5: Mecha-World, Mecha-nisim, Mecha-beasts
  • bruinbruin Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Accualt wrote: »
    Serpent wrote: »
    Deusfaux wrote: »
    not much wii software....

    are people really desperate to try the wii but then once they get it realise there's not a lot of solid material to keep it going atm?

    Or, people are buying lots of different wii games instead of just one game.

    Nah, I think it has more to do with the near complete lack of anything worth owning. I feel so burned by my Wii, thank god for Paper Mario...it is like soothing pain relief cream.

    From a couple pages ago, but 3 of the top 10 software from January through March NPD is Wii -

    Top US software first quarter 2007

    1. PS2 GOD OF WAR II 833K
    2. WII PLAY W/ REMOTE 644K
    3. 360 LOST PLANET: EXTREME CONDITION 573K
    4. 360 CRACKDOWN 540K
    5. PS2 GUITAR HERO 2 W/GUITAR 497K
    6. NDS DIDDY KONG RACING 475K
    7. 360 GEARS OF WAR 426K
    8. WII LEGEND OF ZELDA: TWILIGHT PRINCESS 404K
    9. 360 TOM CLANCY'S GHOST RECON: ADVANCED WARFIGHTER 394K
    10. WII WARIOWARE: SMOOTH MOVES 387K

    4 360, 0 PS3. So Wii software is doing pretty damn well.

    bruin on
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Team regular
    edited April 2007
    bruin wrote: »
    2. WII PLAY W/ REMOTE 644K
    Just me picking nits here... but as an owner of a Wii, I wouldn't have bought Wii Play if remotes were more readily available outside of the bundled package.

    I suspect a great many others would feel the same. That entry on the list feels artificial to me. It would kind of be like saying that Hexic HD (bundled with any 360 hard drive and premium system) was the best selling game in december, with 1.1 million copies sold.

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • AegiesAegies Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Aegies wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    Yeah, seriously. I mean, it's not like there are a bunch of sequels or ports on the Wi- oh, wait. That's right. It's become a home for PS2 and Gamecube ports, and the most anticipated games for the console in reverse order are Metroid Prime 3, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Mario Galaxy.

    Um..... 'kay. What does that have to do with anything I wrote about?

    You're excluding the Wii from the "lack of originality/new IP" tirade in direct contradiction of its current and forecasted software library. Nintendo has built their company not on innovation, but on franchises and sequels. So far, the most original IP releasing in this console generation is for the 360, with the PS3 close behind. So your argument is null, basically. Developers are taking chances. They're just diversifying their portfolios by making sequels and new IP, in case the new IP goes tits up out of the gate. Companies like Capcom are taking chances (even when they're essentially guilted into it by developers, as was the case with Dead Rising), and they're paying off. Lost Planet and Dead Rising are already in their top 40 selling games of all time.

    And not only is the Wii not a more diverse environment in regards to sequels and ports, looking at the charts, the highest ranking Wii games are Nintendo Games. I understand that those might be the better games on the system (with the exception of Wii Play), but developers don't see that. They see the 360 habitually owning the majority of game sales. And I'm surprised GoW II didn't sell better, given the penetration of the PS2.

    Aegies on
    eat. sleep. game.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • HoukHouk Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Pata wrote: »
    Wait I thought all video game consoles are luxury items?
    no, remember, the xbox is the nice steak dinner, but the ps3 is the luxurious banquet, with the wii as the light snack. or something.

    Houk on
  • DagrabbitDagrabbit Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Threepio wrote: »
    Why is it necessary to "win" a format war? Titles are still being developed for all three platforms, each console has penetration in the millions (after 1.5 years of life for one and half a year of life for the other two).

    The whole notion of a format war makes me shake my head a little. I suppose we all need to belong and it's better than gang warfare, but we take it a bit far sometimes.

    Hell, half the reason I stand up for the system is because I'd like to see all three platforms succeed. Folks on this board in particular have motivated me from casual bystander to system owner to system advocate. I'd rather not see any system fail, flounder, founder or fall.

    I suppose this is derivative of the competitive nature of most gamers that there has to be a "winner". Anything less than utter success can be seen as failure. I suppose Sony has taken the place of "The Last Boss" - the hero of the previous game, now set as the villain. Poetic, really. :D

    Well, that's my morning musing. I've got a meeting. See you in a bit lads.

    There's a practical side to wanting a console to fail, despite your efforts to classify it as overly-competitive or a "need to belong." In a world of finite money, buying three consoles may not be feasible. If all three are equally successful, there's a great chance that you won't be able to play as many of the great games as you could if only two were successful (due to exclusivity). Also, in a world of finite money, some people balk at the expense of the PS3 and would really hate it if that became the new standard for pricing consoles. If the PS3 succeeds despite its price point, that sends the companies making consoles the message that they can charge large amounts for new consoles, and it's okay, we'll buy them anyway.

    You shouldn't paint all desire to see a console fail as rampant fanboyism. In the case of the PS3, there is economical reasons for wanting to see it marginalized.

    If there's any psychological impetus for wanting the PS3 to fail, it's that the Sony execs have sounded like a bunch of arrogant assholes to some people, and people usually want arrogant assholes to get their just desserts, not make money hand of fist and "get away with it."

    Dagrabbit on
  • DashuiDashui Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Pata wrote: »
    Wait I thought all video game consoles are luxury items?
    no, remember, the xbox is the nice steak dinner, but the ps3 is the luxurious banquet, with the wii as the light snack. or something.

    No. The PS3 is the Devil's temptation. So it's actually an apple - a rotten apple that causes God's scorn. Don't take that bite and be cast from God's favor. Praise Jesus.

    Dashui on
    Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Team regular
    edited April 2007
    syndalis wrote:
    Now imagine a PS3 is like a wheel of cheese, and a 360 is a tire iron. If you are having woman problems, which would YOU rather have?

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    syndalis wrote: »
    bruin wrote: »
    2. WII PLAY W/ REMOTE 644K
    Just me picking nits here... but as an owner of a Wii, I wouldn't have bought Wii Play if remotes were more readily available outside of the bundled package.

    I suspect a great many others would feel the same. That entry on the list feels artificial to me. It would kind of be like saying that Hexic HD (bundled with any 360 hard drive and premium system) was the best selling game in december, with 1.1 million copies sold.

    and a great many people probably wouldn't have bought Crackdown if it weren't for the Halo 3 beta (i'm not one, i loved the game, and hope anyone that bought it for the beta wound up enjoying it).

    darleysam on
    forumsig.png
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Team regular
    edited April 2007
    darleysam wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    bruin wrote: »
    2. WII PLAY W/ REMOTE 644K
    Just me picking nits here... but as an owner of a Wii, I wouldn't have bought Wii Play if remotes were more readily available outside of the bundled package.

    I suspect a great many others would feel the same. That entry on the list feels artificial to me. It would kind of be like saying that Hexic HD (bundled with any 360 hard drive and premium system) was the best selling game in december, with 1.1 million copies sold.

    and a great many people probably wouldn't have bought Crackdown if it weren't for the Halo 3 beta (i'm not one, i loved the game, and hope anyone that bought it for the beta wound up enjoying it).
    Probably so, but at least Crackdown was a full fledged game with a lot going for it. Wii Play got a BRIEF run for the duck Hunt and the tanks game,t hen never got touched again.

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    God damn, the DS is a monster. First Japan, then the rest of the world - I for one welcome our new two-screened overlords.

    The PS2's sales are impressive as always. It's pretty obvious why, the value of that thing is ridiculous now. It's cheap as hell and its huge library of exclusives is cheaper still.

    Zek on
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aegies wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Aegies wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    Yeah, seriously. I mean, it's not like there are a bunch of sequels or ports on the Wi- oh, wait. That's right. It's become a home for PS2 and Gamecube ports, and the most anticipated games for the console in reverse order are Metroid Prime 3, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Mario Galaxy.

    Um..... 'kay. What does that have to do with anything I wrote about?

    You're excluding the Wii from the "lack of originality/new IP" tirade in direct contradiction of its current and forecasted software library. Nintendo has built their company not on innovation, but on franchises and sequels. So far, the most original IP releasing in this console generation is for the 360, with the PS3 close behind. So your argument is null, basically. Developers are taking chances. They're just diversifying their portfolios by making sequels and new IP, in case the new IP goes tits up out of the gate. Companies like Capcom are taking chances (even when they're essentially guilted into it by developers, as was the case with Dead Rising), and they're paying off. Lost Planet and Dead Rising are already in their top 40 selling games of all time.

    And not only is the Wii not a more diverse environment in regards to sequels and ports, looking at the charts, the highest ranking Wii games are Nintendo Games. I understand that those might be the better games on the system (with the exception of Wii Play), but developers don't see that. They see the 360 habitually owning the majority of game sales. And I'm surprised GoW II didn't sell better, given the penetration of the PS2.



    All he said is that the Wii was the exception where development cost was concerned. He didn't say it was "New Franchise Central!"



    Besides, you have to admit, Wii Sports is a fresh and innovative new franchise, and if nothing else, the Wii Hardware itself is a fresh new take on things. Elebits use the Wiimote to immerse people into the game, and it's pretty damn fresh if not innovative in its gameplay, and is certainly a new IP. The same developer is working on another unique and innovative game in a similar vein to Elebits (not gameplay wise, I mean presentation wise).

    Besides, Nintendo often innovates within series themselves. Mario64 may have been "another mario game," but it broke new grounds and set the standard for 3D platforming; it was hardly a remix of the original NES Super Mario Bros. gameplay. Mario Galaxy will probably be one of the most unique platformers at the time it comes out. Just because they're using the Mario franchise to sell the game doesn't mean that it lacks innovation or new gameplay.


    But besides that, even old franchises feel fresh again. Look at Madden on the Wii; even people turned off by madden's yearly rehashes have found the Wii version fresh and exciting. Sonic the Hedgehog has seen its best game on a home console since the DreamCast, and it's damn good. Other games like SSX, WarioWare, Rayman, and others have benefitted greatly from the Wii controls in an interesting way, even if they aren't excessively 'zomg amazingly new ijnnnovative!' in the gameplay department.


    But besides that, developers are just now turning their attention to the Wii. Before its release, devs/pubs were extremely skeptical of it, just like they were with the DS. Now that the thing is becoming a huge success story, they'll need time and money to bring new stuff to the Wii. In the meantime, they can experiment with the new hardware/interface by releasing what they can until that time.




    But what about the other systems? Just because a game is an existing franchise doesn't mean that it cannot be innovative --- and by the same token, just because something is a NEW franchise doesn't mean that the gameplay cannot be cache, tired, rehashed, and boring.


    Lastly, of course the 360 is getting new stuff. It's been out for a year, it has the lead on the userbase, and developers have had time to start their projects for it. You're going to hear about that stuff now that it's in the works rather than stuff developers are just now starting on.



    To rephrase your statement, "Nintendo has built their company not on innovation or franchises, but on innovation and franchises."

    slash000 on
  • ZombieXZombieX Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    You'd have a point, except new IPs are selling exceedingly well on the 360. It's one of the reasons Capcom is so happy with developing for 360 (which lead to DMC4 being multiplatform): both Lost Planet and Dead Rising made some pretty big numbers. The 360 has seen some really great software penetration.

    The Wii and PS3 are still relatively new and with the Wii seeing very little in the way of new original IPs and the PS3 struggling to gain market penetration, they aren't really seeing this kind of success. But it at least shows that new titles aren't teh doomed. Especially with Gears hitting the 3 million mark and Mass Effect and Bioshock hitting relatively soon.

    ZombieX on
    Undead+Hero%20X.png
  • AoiAoi Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    ZombieX wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    You'd have a point, except new IPs are selling exceedingly well on the 360. It's one of the reasons Capcom is so happy with developing for 360 (which lead to DMC4 being multiplatform): both Lost Planet and Dead Rising made some pretty big numbers. The 360 has seen some really great software penetration.

    The Wii and PS3 are still relatively new and with the Wii seeing very little in the way of new original IPs and the PS3 struggling to gain market penetration, they aren't really seeing this kind of success. But it at least shows that new titles aren't teh doomed. Especially with Gears hitting the 3 million mark and Mass Effect and Bioshock hitting relatively soon.

    And as someone who doesn't plan on buying a PS3 anytime soon, I still also see White Knight (Tales? I can never remember the full name), Heavenly Sword, Lair, Resistance, the new Naughty Dog IP, and a few others. The PS3 will be getting its fair share of new ips as well, so again, in the long run I don't think that's going to be any more of a problem than it was in the past gens.

    Aoi on
  • ZombieXZombieX Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aoi wrote: »
    ZombieX wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    You'd have a point, except new IPs are selling exceedingly well on the 360. It's one of the reasons Capcom is so happy with developing for 360 (which lead to DMC4 being multiplatform): both Lost Planet and Dead Rising made some pretty big numbers. The 360 has seen some really great software penetration.

    The Wii and PS3 are still relatively new and with the Wii seeing very little in the way of new original IPs and the PS3 struggling to gain market penetration, they aren't really seeing this kind of success. But it at least shows that new titles aren't teh doomed. Especially with Gears hitting the 3 million mark and Mass Effect and Bioshock hitting relatively soon.

    And as someone who doesn't plan on buying a PS3 anytime soon, I still also see White Knight (Tales? I can never remember the full name), Heavenly Sword, Lair, Resistance, the new Naughty Dog IP, and a few others. The PS3 will be getting its fair share of new ips as well, so again, in the long run I don't think that's going to be any more of a problem than it was in the past gens.

    Yes, exactly. I didn't mean to be so 360 biased in that post, it's just hard to gauge the success of future titles, while the 360 is seeing that success right now. But the PS3 is definitely seeing some promising new IPs, too. Just have to hope that it gets enough penetration by then to pull out some good numbers, since that's what will ultimately draw developers.

    ZombieX on
    Undead+Hero%20X.png
  • DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Well...as many have said I'm happy that all the consoles are doing so successfully. However, I'd like to say that since like with most consoles you cannot judge anything just yet. The thing about new wares is that nothing gets going until the second year of the console cycle. Really, that's how it is with all consoles cycles, so anything now is to early to judge. But I don't see any console just completely owning the market. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages.

    The PS3 while the "superior" system and one with a very high userbase, has the problem to do with when it comes to price. Now I hear all that stuff about how it's a luxury item and all that but remember the Sega CD was considered a luxury idea too. And that combined with the Saturn and the release of the PSone put Sega in a state of backruptcy(when they'd just been the market leader beforehand). Not to say this will happen to Sony(and I hope it doesn't)...but it will be a trial.

    The 360's biggest weakness is at the moment it's weak Japanese market. Now that won't make or break the system(as it didn't with the Xbox), but it will be something for them to overcome. Now to mention the system failures. And while the 360 is doing well, it still has to get pass the sigma of being an "FPS console". It's seems to be doing that but we'll have to see I guess.

    The Wii. The Wii has a simple market plan. Give people some cheap and fun...and how the Gamecube handled that was a pretty decent choice. I can see the Wii have a pretty decent market(because let's face it, they have the fanbase...and price and message is pretty important to parents buying their kids a console). However, I see Nintendo's biggest trial in the future being that they purposely removed themselves from the current market. If you look at it each generation the consoles have been pretty similar in terms of power, allowing for third parties to port and cross-develop a lot more easily. However, since the Wii doesn't follow this...their relationship with 3rd party developers may be in trouble depending on how well the console does(and let's face it...Nintendo's 3rd party relations have been that way for a while).

    Really, I hope that all the consoles can get past these problems and come out pretty good, but only time will tell and we won't see how things turn out until around the 2nd or 3rd year.

    Dragkonias on
  • WordherderWordherder Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Aegies wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    Aegies wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    Yeah, seriously. I mean, it's not like there are a bunch of sequels or ports on the Wi- oh, wait. That's right. It's become a home for PS2 and Gamecube ports, and the most anticipated games for the console in reverse order are Metroid Prime 3, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Mario Galaxy.

    Um..... 'kay. What does that have to do with anything I wrote about?

    You're excluding the Wii from the "lack of originality/new IP" tirade in direct contradiction of its current and forecasted software library, etc.

    No I didn't. All I did was list the exception to where development costs are going up (which is true and well-documented), but I didn't say it wouldn't affect the Wii. On the contrary, the rising costs in other places are affecting the Wii as well, hence stuff like The Godfather on Wii.

    There are companies that will take risks on new IPs (like Capcom), but companies like EA and Activision, ever-concerned about profits, are going to increasingly play it safe.

    Wordherder on
    Why the crap did I ever make my original name "cloudeagle?"
  • LunkerLunker Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    ZombieX wrote: »
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    So if Sony and MS both have yet to profit on their systems, what does this say about gaming in general? Is it going downhill? Will the Trix rabbit ever get his hands on that delicious yet unobtainable cereal?

    A bit offtopic, but this is a big problem. Development costs for everything except the Wii are going through the roof at all software houses (due to ever more complex development needs), which many people speculate will lead to even MORE reliance on sequels, license-based games and lack of innovation. Not to mention microtransactions.

    Behold the dark side of the constant pursuit for teh pretty graffix.

    You'd have a point, except new IPs are selling exceedingly well on the 360. It's one of the reasons Capcom is so happy with developing for 360 (which lead to DMC4 being multiplatform): both Lost Planet and Dead Rising made some pretty big numbers. The 360 has seen some really great software penetration.

    The Wii and PS3 are still relatively new and with the Wii seeing very little in the way of new original IPs and the PS3 struggling to gain market penetration, they aren't really seeing this kind of success. But it at least shows that new titles aren't teh doomed. Especially with Gears hitting the 3 million mark and Mass Effect and Bioshock hitting relatively soon.
    I really don't want to play List Warzz, but ... Wii Sports is a new IP. As is Elebits, Red Steel, Project Treasure Island Z (or whatever it's called), No More Heroes, Dewy's Adventure, Opoona ... and I never played Excitebike 64 but I think Excite Truck is a pretty epic refreshing of the franchise.

    All of the systems have been getting a fairly good spurt of new IP, so I agree that "increased development cost = automatic lack of innovation" is too broad of a generalization.

    Lunker on
    Tweet my Face: @heyitslunker | Save money at CheapAssGamer (not an affiliate link)
  • DesertBoxDesertBox Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    DesertBox wrote: »
    So ... since the Wii is selling as soon it hits shelves, it's all determined by how fast they produced them and I expected sales this month to be greater than last month. But they're not. The only conclusion is that they produced less?

    But that doesn't make sense at all, especially since March is longer than Feb. Am I missing something?

    So no one knows why the US received less Wiis in March than Feb?

    DesertBox on
  • BTPBTP Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    DesertBox wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    So ... since the Wii is selling as soon it hits shelves, it's all determined by how fast they produced them and I expected sales this month to be greater than last month. But they're not. The only conclusion is that they produced less?

    But that doesn't make sense at all, especially since March is longer than Feb. Am I missing something?

    So no one knows why the US received less Wiis in March than Feb?

    The theory going around is that they've hit their goal of 6 million Wii sold by the end of their fiscal year, and after that they held back the systems for the remaining time until April so that those extra ones could be applied to the next fiscal year (which started April 1).

    BTP on
    Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection & DS High Scores Thread
    I WILL NOT BE DOING 3DS FOR NWC THREAD. SOMEONE ELSE WILL HAVE TO TAKE OVER.
    Spoiler contains Friend Codes. Won't you be my friend?
    My Friend Codes!

    More Friend Codes!
    Mario Kart Wii: 3136-6982-0286 Tetris Party: 2364 1569 4310
    Guitar Hero: Metallica: 1032 7229 7191
    TATSUNOKO VS CAPCOM: 1935-2070-9123

    Nintendo DS:
    Worms: Open Warfare 2: 1418-7870-1606 Space Bust-a-Move: 017398 403043
    Scribblenauts: 1290-7509-5558
  • Shooter McgavinShooter Mcgavin Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    BTP wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    So ... since the Wii is selling as soon it hits shelves, it's all determined by how fast they produced them and I expected sales this month to be greater than last month. But they're not. The only conclusion is that they produced less?

    But that doesn't make sense at all, especially since March is longer than Feb. Am I missing something?

    So no one knows why the US received less Wiis in March than Feb?

    The theory going around is that they've hit their goal of 6 million Wii sold by the end of their fiscal year, and after that they held back the systems for the remaining time until April so that those extra ones could be applied to the next fiscal year (which started April 1).

    I thought I heard a quote somewhere from one of the higher ups in Gamestop that this is not what Nintendo is doing? I still don't see an abundance of Wii's on the shelves, let alone any.

    Shooter Mcgavin on
    banner.gif
  • slurpeepoopslurpeepoop Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    BTP wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    So ... since the Wii is selling as soon it hits shelves, it's all determined by how fast they produced them and I expected sales this month to be greater than last month. But they're not. The only conclusion is that they produced less?

    But that doesn't make sense at all, especially since March is longer than Feb. Am I missing something?

    So no one knows why the US received less Wiis in March than Feb?

    The theory going around is that they've hit their goal of 6 million Wii sold by the end of their fiscal year, and after that they held back the systems for the remaining time until April so that those extra ones could be applied to the next fiscal year (which started April 1).

    Also, places that NPD don't track, like Wal-Mart, may have used their corporate muscle to get a few extra pallets of systems in their stores.




    Wait a sec, NPD is the one that doesn't get Wal-Mart sales, right?

    slurpeepoop on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    BTP wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    So ... since the Wii is selling as soon it hits shelves, it's all determined by how fast they produced them and I expected sales this month to be greater than last month. But they're not. The only conclusion is that they produced less?

    But that doesn't make sense at all, especially since March is longer than Feb. Am I missing something?

    So no one knows why the US received less Wiis in March than Feb?

    The theory going around is that they've hit their goal of 6 million Wii sold by the end of their fiscal year, and after that they held back the systems for the remaining time until April so that those extra ones could be applied to the next fiscal year (which started April 1).

    Also, places that NPD don't track, like Wal-Mart, may have used their corporate muscle to get a few extra pallets of systems in their stores.




    Wait a sec, NPD is the one that doesn't get Wal-Mart sales, right?
    I thought they just estimated the Walmart sales?

    Couscous on
  • slurpeepoopslurpeepoop Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    BTP wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    DesertBox wrote: »
    So ... since the Wii is selling as soon it hits shelves, it's all determined by how fast they produced them and I expected sales this month to be greater than last month. But they're not. The only conclusion is that they produced less?

    But that doesn't make sense at all, especially since March is longer than Feb. Am I missing something?

    So no one knows why the US received less Wiis in March than Feb?

    The theory going around is that they've hit their goal of 6 million Wii sold by the end of their fiscal year, and after that they held back the systems for the remaining time until April so that those extra ones could be applied to the next fiscal year (which started April 1).

    Also, places that NPD don't track, like Wal-Mart, may have used their corporate muscle to get a few extra pallets of systems in their stores.




    Wait a sec, NPD is the one that doesn't get Wal-Mart sales, right?
    I thought they just estimated the Walmart sales?

    Yeah, but NPD probably doesn't account for Wal-Mart suits working over the Nintendo distribution guy with a sock of pennies until the distribution guy agrees to transfer additional units to Wal_Mart.

    Those Wal-Mart guys don't play fair.

    slurpeepoop on
  • fragglefartfragglefart Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    As much as I love the big budget platform-exclusivity system wars, million dollar game shoulder-barging, the thing I love about this gen is the retro thang.

    I'm yet to buy a Wii, but the VC, I could throw £100-£200 on it right now.

    The 360 Live Arcade is where I spend most of my gaming time these days. Throwaway small chunks of time, cheap games, old school arcade fundamentals within gameplay, and a tonne of replayability.

    Awesome. I love it.

    fragglefart on
    fragglefart.jpg
  • Target PracticeTarget Practice Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    syndalis wrote: »
    bruin wrote: »
    2. WII PLAY W/ REMOTE 644K
    Just me picking nits here... but as an owner of a Wii, I wouldn't have bought Wii Play if remotes were more readily available outside of the bundled package.

    I suspect a great many others would feel the same. That entry on the list feels artificial to me. It would kind of be like saying that Hexic HD (bundled with any 360 hard drive and premium system) was the best selling game in december, with 1.1 million copies sold.

    I don't suppose it's occurred to you that the great number of previous "non-gamers" who've bought the thing -- you know, the demographic that Nintendo is specifically targeting -- are interested in precisely this sort of game.

    Of course, it's impossible to know for certain, but I do think it's somewhat silly to assume that just because you as a self-styled hardcore gamer (or whatever) aren't interested in Wii Play, that the casual market isn't.

    Target Practice on
    sig.gif
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Team regular
    edited April 2007
    syndalis wrote: »
    bruin wrote: »
    2. WII PLAY W/ REMOTE 644K
    Just me picking nits here... but as an owner of a Wii, I wouldn't have bought Wii Play if remotes were more readily available outside of the bundled package.

    I suspect a great many others would feel the same. That entry on the list feels artificial to me. It would kind of be like saying that Hexic HD (bundled with any 360 hard drive and premium system) was the best selling game in december, with 1.1 million copies sold.

    I don't suppose it's occurred to you that the great number of previous "non-gamers" who've bought the thing -- you know, the demographic that Nintendo is specifically targeting -- are interested in precisely this sort of game.

    Of course, it's impossible to know for certain, but I do think it's somewhat silly to assume that just because you as a self-styled hardcore gamer (or whatever) aren't interested in Wii Play, that the casual market isn't.
    Wow, way to drop words in my mouth. "Self Styled Hardcore gamer"? Really?

    I am simply saying what a great many others have said. If it wasn't for the fact that it came with a remote, it wouldn't be worth the scratch. It's a collection of seriously unfleshed out tech demos, only two of which have any true redeeming value, and all of which can be rocked through in a very short period of time. It doesn't have the depth of golf, bowling or Tennis from Wii sports, and generally was reviewed in the median range of five out of ten. It was a subpar game that only got it's spot because people NEED more wiimotes for the other, more deserving titles.

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • Big DookieBig Dookie Smells great! DownriverRegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I've got to agree with syndalis here. I love the Wii and all, but there's no way Wii Play would have sold so many copies if it didn't come with the remote. At least, not in the U.S.

    Big Dookie on
    Steam | Twitch
    Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
Sign In or Register to comment.