Messages

1

Nintendo Gaming / Re: The 3rd Party Wall of Shame

« on: February 28, 2010, 11:44:12 PM »

As Mop it up pointed out, the install base is larger, now. Plus, NSMB Wii will have primed more people for the game.


If it doesn't outsell the first Galaxy, then it's not a system-seller at all, and using movie-based terms, I wouldn't call it a blockbuster, either. A sequel on the same system as its predecessor should outsell that predecessor, due to larger install base of the system. If it doesn't, it can't be as good as the original. This is, of course, assuming that the brand isn't destroyed by the first title, so that people don't buy the second one.

Since when has buying the first game in a series constituted buying the sequel? And even further how does not outselling the first galaxy even come close to questioning the quality of the game?

It's not that buying the first game constitutes buying the sequel. It's that, with a larger install base, it should be capable of selling at least as many copies, if equal in quality. Those who bought the first but don't buy the sequel should be offset by those who buy only the sequel, due to a larger install base.


Obviously, one must remember the distinction between the game's quality and its success. For instance, maybe Darkside Chronicles is a better game than Umbrella Chronicles... but Umbrella Chronicles came closer to being a system-seller (although it wasn't one). Just as a blockbuster movie isn't just a good movie, but a movie that breaks records at the box office, so too is a system-seller a game that goes beyond just being quality.




BlackNMild2k1 - Marvelous Interactive/Rising Star Games has been missed... although, their wall would be one of the few that I'd be tempted to call a "wall of <something other than shame>". Their games have consistently been niche, but their support of the Wii is clear-cut, and only one game on the list would fail to be considered at least decent (and even that one, I'm not sure of). Also, Atari hasn't been listed, nor has Disney, Hudson, Koei, LucasArts, or Warner Bros.

2

Nintendo Gaming / Re: The 3rd Party Wall of Shame

« on: February 28, 2010, 09:28:42 PM »

I'd argue that if a game can't surpass its predecessor, then it couldn't have been as good as the predecessor, and thus doesn't deserve the status, anyway.

A sequel can only surpass its predecessor by appealing to more people. Super Mario Galaxy 2 won't appeal to more people than Galaxy 1.

As Mop it up pointed out, the install base is larger, now. Plus, NSMB Wii will have primed more people for the game.


If it doesn't outsell the first Galaxy, then it's not a system-seller at all, and using movie-based terms, I wouldn't call it a blockbuster, either. A sequel on the same system as its predecessor should outsell that predecessor, due to larger install base of the system. If it doesn't, it can't be as good as the original. This is, of course, assuming that the brand isn't destroyed by the first title, so that people don't buy the second one.

3

Nintendo Gaming / Re: The 3rd Party Wall of Shame

« on: February 28, 2010, 08:02:51 AM »

Hi, first time post, joined just because I was getting frustrated at seeing everyone miss the obvious term for the gaming equivalent of a blockbuster.
It's called a System Seller, everyone. They're games that are so good, so desired by people, that they'll go and buy the system for that specific game. Few games truly achieve system-seller status.
Anyway, those walls of shame are quite revealing. I only wish it were possible to get budget data, so that you could re-generate the walls from the developer/publisher perspective, and see how much money would be saved by cutting out all the shovelware, and how much would be able to be fed into the decent games to make them great games. Heck, there are some games that could have been system sellers, if they'd been given the appropriate budget.

But is system seller broad enough to describe all the titles we are referring to? What of sequel games that are made for fans of the first? How many people will buy Galaxy 2 that haven't picked up Galaxy 1? Or Gears of War 2 and Gears 1?

Good thought for a term, though.

I'd argue that if a game can't surpass its predecessor, then it couldn't have been as good as the predecessor, and thus doesn't deserve the status, anyway.


And I'd argue the same regarding movie sequels - if the sequel isn't pulling in anyone who didn't watch the first one, it's not really busting any blocks, if you don't mind the tortured terminology.

4

Nintendo Gaming / Re: The 3rd Party Wall of Shame

« on: February 28, 2010, 03:24:38 AM »

Hi, first time post, joined just because I was getting frustrated at seeing everyone miss the obvious term for the gaming equivalent of a blockbuster.
It's called a System Seller, everyone. They're games that are so good, so desired by people, that they'll go and buy the system for that specific game. Few games truly achieve system-seller status.
Anyway, those walls of shame are quite revealing. I only wish it were possible to get budget data, so that you could re-generate the walls from the developer/publisher perspective, and see how much money would be saved by cutting out all the shovelware, and how much would be able to be fed into the decent games to make them great games. Heck, there are some games that could have been system sellers, if they'd been given the appropriate budget.