ZOMG XBOX360 VS. PS3 VS. WII ZOMG

Pong FTW

 

Ok Ultra, let's cut to the chase and end this charade and poor excuse of a debate between the both of us, as you don't follow debate rules at all. Here's the deal, we're going to focus on one claim that you've made (in which you have failed to defend successfully against my counter-examples) mentioned in the following below. Also, this very post will be the last time I will ever address your last post with a rebuttal. In which you are no longer allowed to refute against at all, given that the moderator, Winterreise, has made his official call that everything in your last post was entirely baseless and does absolutely nothing to contribute to your argument and this debate as well.

At this point, you are also not allowed to make anymore claims or points given that your side of the argument already has more holes than a block of swiss cheese. Your reply must consist of answers to my following questions in bold only. Should you post more claims or points that have no relevance or bearing at all to my questions, I will just ignore them and keep pointing to the questions that I have asked in this post until you answer them. After all, any new points you have made so far do not contribute anything productive to this debate as it is nothing more than a cheap ploy of debate tactics of dodging other points and barraging opponents with new ones.

You made a claim that long term sales dictate quality of games. Take a look at your argument here:

And this:

^ Those were taken straight from your posts, in exact context of what you said. So, there should be nothing to dispute here regarding the posts I have cited, unless you choose to forfeit this debate entirely and just debate with yourself. Given that I have quoted you, I assure you that nothing you have said has been altered in anyway, with exception of highlighting. And just for my sake of proof that you should suspect of foul play on my part, I have screenshotted your posts so that you can see that your posts match those quotes word for word.

First Post
Second Post

Your only obligation on your side regarding past posts used is to not edit any of your posts to employ a cheap trick. Should you choose to do that, I will present the original screenshot of your post (along with the post date and edit date) in which, everyone else who is paying a keen eye to this topic will take notice of your foul actions.

Now, I have provided counter-examples to your claim to show that long-term sales of games do not indicate quality. One of them was the consumer reviews of the Mario Kart Wii game, of which each of those consumers have purchased the game during the long-term period. You did point out that the majority of recent consumers were satisfied, but as I said, none of those positive reviews can null out the validity of my counter-examples that show that people don't buy games necessarily for quality, but rather for an expectation that the game would be of good quality to them. Remember, those four people I have cited in my last post were disappointed, and none of those positive reviews you've cited can change any of that.

If you want to glance over that counter-example of Mario Kart Wii, we can go ahead and take that off the table. But I still have another counter-example which has a more stronger footing that shows that long-term sales do not equal quality.

You may recall the Wii Play game I have pointed out from two posts ago. This game was released on February 13, 2007. Two years, and eight months later, that game is ranked 23rd on the weekly best-selling list, and is currently ranked 5 on the yearly best-selling list. Yet, what sticks out like a sore thumb regarding this best-selling game is the mediocre consumer feedback reviews it got. What more? Even the gaming community said this best-selling game was a mediocre. And, from both public forums, many people mentioned that the Wii Play game bundle was "worth buying just for the extra Wii-mote controller", but unfortunately, they didn't say the same to the Wii Play game that came with it.

Also, if you are going to point out that a majority of Amazon consumers have given 4 to 5 stars, do pay attention to their comments; many of them praised that bundle just for the Wii controller, but did not express the same praise for the game. And another thing to point out, just to get my bases covered, even the most recent reviews from consumers are mediocre with very few of them praising the game. The other recent customers just praise the bundle for the controller.

And now, I present you the following questions:

1.) What do the long-term sale records of the Wii Play game indicate about the Wii Play game itself, given that the Wii Play game has been a successful, 5th-ranked, best-selling game of the year?

2.) Why is the Wii-Play one of the best-selling games after TWO YEARS since its release date, despite the overall and recent mediocre consumer feedback?

3.) How come the consumer feedback reviews of the Wii Play game do not match up to the expectations of quality as indicated by the Wii Play sales records?

4.) Final question, if a consumer bought the Wii Play game just for being intrigued by the Wii mote controller that came with that game, plays the game, and is completely unsatisfied with the game, who is at fault?

These are the questions that I am holding you accountable for to answer. And you must answer all of them. This will determine how well your claim that "long term sales measures or indicates quality" holds. Also, do keep in mind that the Wii Play game, whether sold with a bundle or not, makes no difference to your claim. After all, you said the following:

ScreenCap

And, not only are you under obligation to defend your "long-term sales indicates quality" claim, but you are also under obligation to defend the Wii Play game's quality as well.

Just so you know, your answer to all my questions will determine which one of us wins this debate. So, go do your research, and start constructing your best damn defense that you can come up with. Good luck.


And to make my last rebuttal and penalize you with logical fallacies to your points:

Strawman Fallacy. That's a cheap attempt at twisting my statements. I cited that Nintendo has been successful at aiming for familes and young children. That doesn't necessarily imply from me that Nintendo is excluding anyone.

Ever heard of long-lasting appeal? Even the vice-president of sales and marketing of Nintendo mentions this:

Come on, Ultra! As a Nintendo fan, you should know this!

That's an irrelevant point and an irrelevant question, Ultra. This is why I have called for certain conditions in the beginning of my post. The only thing I see this pertaining to is the issue of demographics, in which I have cited as one of the reasons for long-term sales. In which the above is derived from your cheap attempt at using the strawman fallacy. So, your quote above is voided.

Thank you for stating the obvious to me. And thanks for insulting my intelligence by talking down to me as if I was some two-year-old that doesn't know any of that stuff as you pretend to know everything about marketing and economics, in which you clearly are not an expert in.

Nothing here is cited or backed up. I'm going to refer you to Winterreise's post on this one: read the debate rules.

No seniors playing the 360 or the PS3? Are you double sure about that? Because here's a counter example:

Old Grandma Hardcore.

Meet the gaming Hardcore Grandma:


Hardcore Grandma loves video games. She even loves playing games on the Xbox360 and the PS3. And man, for someone her age (she's in her 70s by the way!) that would have been stereotyped as a technophobe, she is GOOD!

Here's a video of Hardcore Grandma playing Mass Effect on the XBox 360.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k4UvIAcrmU

And here's a video of Hardcore Grandma playing Resistance Fall of Man on the Playstation 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkCbWDeapAo

And for more enjoyment, you can watch more videos of her playing the Xbox360, Playstation 3, and the Wii in awe, and in disbelief that your stereotypical assumption has been debunked: http://www.youtube.com/user/oghc

Want more?
http://kotaku.com/5015991/dad-buys-ps3-mgs4 <- A 70 year old Dad plays Metal Gear Solid 4 on the PS3. Yeah, it's a blog testimonial, but if you are going to use a testimonial from a Nintendo magazine that shows that an old man plays NES games, then I too can use a testimonial to show that an old man plays PS3 games as well.

This goes to show that you should be careful when you assume things. After all, assumptions so far have always gotten you into trouble in this debate.

So, what did you say? No old people playing games on the Xbox 360 and the PS3? Hardcore Grandma would like to have a word with you, while she kicks your ass on Brothers In Arms and Call of Duty!

You're not in the clear at all. You used those testimonials to conclude that if Sony and Microsoft were to "take over gaming", then "gaming will eventually die". Thus, I have charged you with a non-sequitur fallacy violation.

^ You've said that based on the testimonials from a Nintendo magazine, that there is no other console besides the Wii that brings people very close to video games. And then you somehow imply that based on your previous statement, that "gaming has moved away from what it was in the past, games that everyone could play and for everyone to enjoy. And then, from those previous statements, you then conclude with assertion that, based on your previous statements you just made, it somehow "tells you that if gaming is to continue in the direction that sony and microsoft were heading, gaming would have truly become seperated and eventually die."

And here's why the non-sequitur fallacy charge is being held against you. Your flow of statements up to your conclusion has holes. First off, your transition between your each and every statement (including your testimonial cited from the Nintendo magazine), has no clear flow at all. Take a look at what you exactly wrote:

Let's pause here. The transition between your first two sentences is bad. You first showed that the NES console system has potential of captivating a senior gamer via testimonial from a Nintendo magazine, and then you state that only the Wii has the capability of putting such hold on gamers. Your latter statement is not a proper implication at all. Instead, it is nothing more than an assertion without support. Neither the first or second sentences show the logic and reason of how and why the Wii is captivating audiences just like the NES console did.

Now, let's take it one step further: second and third statements also in consecutive order:

Let's pause again. This is where your flow of statements starts falling apart. You offered no explanation in between of how "gaming has moved far away" in a gradual fashion. You offered no supporting evidence between gaming from the past up through till now. Instead, you just jumped to the present and threw in another assertion that "gaming has moved far away." Again, you have failed to show what happened between the NES era, and the present era. You failed to explain the 16-bit and 32-bit gaming eras, the days of the Super Nintendo, and the Sega Genesis, and the arrival of the Playstation and other new consoles. Thus, you have jumped to an assertion.

And for the last two sentences:

And here, you have jumped from your third premise to the conclusion. Again, no transition flow, no explanation for your conclusion. You just threw in Sony and Microsoft out of the blue and just tacked on the charge that "gaming will truly become seperated and eventually die." No substantial evidence was presented from you on how Microsoft and Sony will bring gaming to its death knell. And not to mention that due to the lack of transition presented in this sentence, there are still possibilities that other logical readers can ask about: What if gaming of today will be just like the gaming of tomorrow with no changes? What if the way Microsoft and Sony continues their methods of gaming draws in more consumers? What if Microsoft and Sony manage to change direction and set a revolutionary gaming trend in their own ways, just like Nintendo? These are valid questions anyone can ask regarding your last two statements, which shows reasonable doubt that your conclusion holds water.

Hence, I charge you with a non-sequitur fallacy violation. And in case you aren't aware, logic and reason dictate the rules of debate, and those who follow logic and reason diligently win debates.



Now, as I said, you are no longer allowed to refute my rebuttal with new points or arguments. You are only allowed to answer my very questions that I have presented in the beginning of my post. And also, do keep in mind that you are now under obligation to follow the debate rules that Winterreise has pointed out. So your responses to my questions better be well-thought out with reasonable explanations, cited sources, and no logical fallacies, as you have so many logical fallacy counts against you. Keep in mind that you are under obligation to defend your claim that "long-term sales measure quality of games", and you also have to defend the quality of the Wii Play game itself.

And Ultra, here's something for you to know: I have countless experience regarding debates, and I am quite familiar with all the ins and outs of it. I have seen time and time again of people using cheap tactics and logical fallacies in a desperate attempt to hammer their point, and I have successfully destroyed the credibility of every opponent's arguments of whom I've came across that have tried to use them. And take my word for it, you are no different compared to any opponent that I have seen and came across in the past that has tried to use such cheap tricks, especially the ones that you have tried (and failed) to employ here in this debate.

I've even dealt opponents like you in which people would say, "arguing with that particular person is like arguing with a wall." Many people may not know how to truly defeat a "wall opponent" like yourself other than just ignoring them, but trust me, I am well-determined enough to truly defeat you and make you realize it, whether you like it or not.

EDIT: Oct. 25th 2009 - Fixed Screenshot URLs.

 

End this once and for all!
Hypr won!
Even mods said it!

 

Calm down ASD789. Let Ultra have his chance to respond to my questions. As I said, his response to my questions will determine which one of us wins this debate.

 

Meh.
Lets!

 

i will not refute back not because i can't but because 1-i've been flagged and 2-i'm still wrong after refuting.

when cammie dunaway said "long lasting appeal", it was nice you took it literally. but i told you before, you can't look at it literally, you have to look at it "between the lines". the world lives in two forms, the literal and the metaphorical. only when you can read the metaphorical, will you really see the real world. but in this forum, no one reads the metaphorical, everyone reads the literal. hypr proved it.

 

Ultra, you musn't of heard the saying "looking at the whole picture". And, how else could you see THAT between the lines? Long lasting appeal either means how long the game will last for the consumer, or how long it can stay in the market and stay succesful, depending on context, there's no metaphorical way of seeing it. Especially in the quote that Hypr's given.

I also expected you not to answer any of Hypr's questions. Huh, go figure. You won't answer because you simply can't, you can still post (or refute) after being flagged, and you're still wrong? Well, huh, wonder why. Hypr's only asking questions that can easily be answered with some support and logical reasoning behind it, and you're unable to do so.

If I were in your position ultra, I'd just give in, even in your shoes I can't argue with the questions Hypr have given you with support and evidence without bringing up a different game or something (which would then be avoiding the question).

 

I'll take this as an informal way of you saying that you forfeit. You copped out as usual.

Regarding your statement of "metaphorical interpretations", the metaphorical concepts do not apply to this debate unless we are debating something that is open to interpretation, such as the bible and religion. In this debate, we are strictly looking at facts and evidence. There is almost nothing to interpret in this debate. For you to bring up the idea that this entire debate was about interpreting and reading between the lines, is just like you bringing only a sword to a gunfight.

I like to consider myself as a reasonable man, Ultra. Just so you know, the offer is still stands. You can still grab it while you have a chance. All you have to do is answer those four questions Ultra.

If you want to prove us all wrong, now is your chance. Final offer!

And just so you know Ultra, here are the winning conditions for you spelled out in plain terms. All four of these conditions must be achieved in order for you to win. That is my ultimatum.



WINNING CONDITIONS FOR ULTRA IN THIS DEBATE:

* All four questions in bold presented in the previous post must be answered.

* Successfully defend the claim that "long-term sales measure quality" via reasonable proof and logic.

* Successfully defend the quality of the Wii Plus Game equivalent to the expected value implied by long-term sales records.

* ABSOLUTELY NO CONTRADICTIONS CAN BE PRESENT IN ANY STATEMENTS AT ALL! This also applies to all statements made in the past!

 

...

For a moment I...

Man-I mis-understood what your point was HYPR for a moment

Well I'm just happy that the wii is currently in the lead...


[me=mds64]runs away from backlash, but turns around and say's...[/me]


YOU WON THIS DEBATE!

 

I'm still giving Ultra my ultimatum. He still has a chance to make a comeback, but he must pull through all four of those winning conditions I have set forth for him.

And just so you and everyone knows, I hold no grudge against Nintendo at all. In fact, I don't even support Sony or Microsoft in that matter as well. Frankly, I'm indifferent towards all three of those (gaming console) companies.

And as for the reason why I'm debating against Ultra in particular: because my bullshit-detector goes off the charts for each and every post he makes in this topic.

 

That's what I realised when I saw your response.

While I'm a born hardcore nintendo fan (who just uses sony consoles to bring down thier software sales-thank god for img burn and return policies ) I'm indifferent to them as well.

I've played all 3 systems-infact these days I would own all 3-but due to room space and cost-I chose the wii.

Years back I was agains't sony and microsoft because they were not dedicated game companies-just global market companies trying to make a buck.

But after sega bowed out-I realised that it's a dying breed...

These days-I don't mind playing ethier console-sure if I had a ps3 or 360 I'd be ripping games and using those-but the mentioned conditions (and ps3 not being able to play rips..) I was restricted...

The wii for now is unmodded-until the system actually dies it'll stay that way-only unofficial device is the dodgy battery charger for the remotes XD

(Not that I should-but hay-when you have 200 actual games about-wouldn't you want to conserve on box space-and cash-prehaps I might lucky on ebay again XD)

 

here is my response and i'm actually allowed to post feedback without supporting documents. lol. winter is a mod and he doesn't even realize it. and i laugh at that list everytime!

The game has done its job. The wii play game is a multiplayer game and when people bought the package, it was to promote multiplayer. Nintendo knew that when people played wii sports, they would eventually buy a second controller. This means that people would be interested in multiplayer games as the reason for buying a second controller. If you were not interested in multiplayer games, then you would not buy a second controller. The fact that people bought the wii play package means they wanted more multiplayer games to play. If they did not wanted more multiplayer games, then they would not buy the wii play package. Basically people bought it because they wanted more multiplayer games and this game has a high multiplayer value.

I can say that one of the highlights of the game is the multiplayer. The game promotes multiplayer. The game promotes multiplayer. The game promotes multiplayer. Multiplayer with other people. The mediocre reviews are those who only play the game as what it is and if you play the game within the confines as a single player or within limited groups then it is mediocre or lower. But if you read the reviews, you often find that when they have friends or other people stop by their houses and have the game around, people have fun playing with the game. Again, the game is promoting multiplayer. Sometimes you hear people having a party and they would leave this game around and people stand around and having fun playing the wii play games. The constant reaction is the games high multiplayer value as people are having fun. That is the value of this game and it’s a very high value.

1 and 2 are together from above. Read the comments by the people in those reviews and try to understand what exactly they are saying. you'll have to do the inferencing yourself because part of being enlightened is to encourage further thinking after being sparked.

3-The quality of wii play doesn’t match those of the reviewers because of the intent of the game. The game is a multiplayer game and it is mediocre if it is not played in it’s intent. if you’re going to play this game as a single player, then it’ll be mediocre or lower but if you play this game with several people then it will be mediocre to high. But if you play it with a large group of people, then the game becomes higher. If you have a wii and go to your local bar or place it in a public area, put the wii with wii play so people can play the game, you’ll get a lot of people crowding around the wii, playing this game because of it’s high value in multiplayer. This is why wii play is very successful and it’s why people bought it.

4-Who is at fault? The company. The company is the one who is to setup the sales and production of the product. If the intent of the software misses, then the company is at fault, not the consumer. It is better to have the company at fault and should be the companies full responsibility because as the company, you have to make the needs necessary that it meets the peoples needs. If a company makes a software and people don’t get it or whatever the reason, it is not the consumers fault. but the company. However, with the hardcore, it is the consumers fault. How awful it is to be a hardcore. Lol!

----------------------------------------------------------
When cammie said, long lasting appeal, it isn’t appeal she’s talking about. Appeal can only last so long, just as how marketing or hype [brainwashing] can last so long. When cammie says long lasting appeal, she’s referring to value. How can a game that lasted for 20 years still have a long lasting appeal to new consumers who are new into gaming after that game was released? The answer is that it isn’t appeal, it’s value, it has a high value. When something is in high value, then people would want it. Only when something has a high value will it constantly become a “long lasting appeal”. There are substitutes for appeal but there are no substitutes for value. Super Mario brothers is high in value and there are many clones of it. But for some reason, it is still the best because of the high value it has in the software. For a game to be in the market for 20 years and still sell, it means it isn’t appeal, it’s the value.

I like natewlie’s quote,
"...Long lasting appeal either means how long the game will last for the consumer, or how long it can stay in the market and stay succesful, depending on context, there's no metaphorical way of seeing it..."

super Mario brothers has been in the market place for 20years and it has out lived the “lasting for the consumer” and it has out lived in “staying in the market place and it’s still successful”. How would you explain that?

I told you to read between the lines. But you do not read between the lines and you will never understand the success of the wii. It is why what I have said is wrong because you are all too literal. the further you look into video games, the futher it becomes depressing.

--------------------------------------------------------
When I posted this comment,
"kids are the toughest people to sell to. how do you entertain a child who has short attention span? i don't know how or why these game critics and game developers think it's easy to entertain children but they are not easily entertained."

Hypr says it’s irrelevant. But if the wii is labeled as a kid system, then it does prove relevance. How so, because it shows that Nintendo is working hard to make software that is very entertaining for kids and if it entertains kids [as kids are very short in their attention] then it’ll entertain adults. Adults are just like kids and even worse, and if you can’t get peoples attention, then you’re product will fail. So I don’t know why hypr omitted the comment. so why did he?

----------------------------------------------
Here is a few question I want you to answer,

how do you explain the success of the wii?

How do you explain the decline in sales [hardware and software] of the ps3/360?

What is sony and Microsoft doing to expand their products to new consumers?

Why is there a push for motion controller by sony and Microsoft when time and time again they have repeated that they don’t want it and yet here is is?

i'm going to retract after these questions are answered because it's taking much of my time posting comments. but it was fun even after constantly being argued that i was wrong by making up crazy ideas and being ganged up by 4 hardcore members. lol! debates about winning! lol!

 

Ultra,

I'm not going to bother answering your questions. Wanna know why?

Because you lost.

You just contradicted your own claim that "long-term sales" measure quality, and since you pointed out that the consumers bought the game for other reason than its main intent, it goes to show that the long term sales of the Wii Play game do not measure the quality of the game accurately.

Think about this Ultra, if consumers see a game in an attractive package, but the game is bad for both, single or multiplayer, yet that game package gets sold for a long term (say two to three years) just by its presence, do you think those sales records generated by that game package accurately represent quality?

Good try Ultra. This debate is done, and you did yourself in. This goes to show that your true opponent of this debate was yourself, not me. By the way, in case if you have not figured it out, all four of those questions was a huge elaborate trap just to get you to shoot yourself (and your arguments) in the foot, which was exactly what I wanted you to do. You have proven to be your own worst enemy.

And by the way, your answer to my 4th question shows that Nintendo is also guilty of gimmicking consumers as well. After all, which company developed and published the Wii Plus game, and sold it as an attractive package? That's right, Nintendo.

You can now walk away from this topic and start eating crow. I'm not going to bother replying to this topic, or you ever again, as such a debate with someone inept like you is unhealthy for my brain cells.

EDIT:

Here's where you failed in terms of your objectives by the way, in red.



WINNING CONDITIONS FOR ULTRA IN THIS DEBATE:

* All four questions in bold presented in the previous post must be answered. <- Requirement met.

* Successfully defend the claim that "long-term sales measure quality" via reasonable proof and logic. <- Pointed out a different factor that consumers bought the "Wii Play" game for a different intent. That factor shows interference in terms of measuring "quality" through long-term sales. Hence a contradiction to that very claim.

* Successfully defend the quality of the Wii Plus Game equivalent to the expected value implied by long-term sales records. <- I'm really iffy about this one, as your response marginally satisfies this requirement. And by marginal, I mean borderline.

* ABSOLUTELY NO CONTRADICTIONS CAN BE PRESENT IN ANY STATEMENTS AT ALL! This also applies to all statements made in the past! <- See 2nd condition.



Now, I'll just go fine tune and recalibrate my bullshit-detector by playing some Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney games on the DS. How's that for a 'hardcore' player to you?

 

Ok so basically take everything that Ultra said about wii-play in his last post and apply it to rockband.

 

Ultra, look up the definition(s) of appeal and try again, or better yet, don't try again.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/appeal

Depending if the game has VALUE, it still has APPEAL. If a game isn't appealing, then it isn't really worth playing anymore, is it? All games have a certain initial appeal to them, be it Mario, Wii Play, Borderlands or anything, if the game still have value to the consumer, then it's still worth playing and is still appealing to play to the consumer.

I can't even fanthom what you're trying to say in your reply since what you said is an oxymoron. Read what you said, "out lived the “lasting for the consumer”" and "out lived in “staying in the market place and it’s still successful”."

Mario is still succesful in the market because Nintendo adds a few things each iteration to make it new, just like ANY sequel. At the same time it's making the past game different from the sequels and making them still somewhat 'new' to a player that's new to them.

Also Rock Band/Guitar Hero is a lot more popular in bars and pubs if you hadn't noticed. Wii Play in bars (with 694,000 results) Versus Rock Band in bars (with 24.1 million results).

Ultra, my main point I've been making in this topic is that all systems have their good points, and their bad ones. Some people are obviously going to like one of them better than the other. You've been arguing against this for some reason and have been telling me that the Wii is better than both the PS3 and 360. Sales wise, yes, of course, only a baffoon doesn't know that, but that doesn't mean everyone who has and doesn't have a Wii agrees that the Wii is the best. I have a Wii and I don't think it's the best. It's like me saying, I like oranges better than apples, then you come in and say that apples sold more and are healthier than oranges. Well, so what, I still like the orange more.

Again, and I'm sure Hypr will back me up on this, as he has in the PSP vs DS topic. No system is better than the other.

Just like how a mom will say that no child is better than the other child.

 

I agree with Nat-I own a wii-while I like it and support nintendo enough to not mod it-it's...not how I roll.

I prefer the classic remote control games-unless it's minimal wii remote usage or a arcade shooter like house of the dead-it's not gonna get me.

Every time I got a new nintendo system I looked foward to some amazing games-but the wii games-as good as they are-seem...shorter?

And they don't consume my life like the others (I never stopped playing mario 64 until I got every single star-and because of my skill back then-it took me over a year...where's no more heros-a fantastic game-seemed short-sure I done 22 hours but those were in short burst mixed in with my older consoles).

Every system has it's goods and bads...

To be honest-I would have got a ps3 instead of a wii it not for price-60gb's are hard to find-space-and running cost...


As well as a little brother begging me to get it-he over come my parents wanting a ps3.


I have to say-I enjoyed it more than I thought I would but it's not my cup of tea...


In otherwords-everything has it's own points-but it's one's opinion that counts.

But no need to force other's into it XD

 

now hypr chickened out!
even if i lost, you can still prove your strong arguement ability to fully seal my lost.
i have answered all of your questions, it is only fair you answer my question.

 

I'm feeling like I should reply to your questions since they can easily be answered.

1. The Wii is so successful because of it's mainstream appeal to everyone.

2. Where did you get this from? Is this one of your baseless assumptions?Sales for the 360 and PS3 have been steady and even increased from launch. Also there's a brief slump for all three consoles during I pressume the summer, then bumps up during the holidays.

3. Motion control, yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay. Why they're doing this? Well the Wii is making money off their gimmick, why can't Sony and Microsoft do the same? Sales, sales, sales. Don't give me garbage that Sony and MS are just in it for the money, Nintendo's in it just for the money just the same as Sony and MS.

4. Cite a source for Sony and Microsoft saying that they don't want motion control, I looked and haven't found it. Technically, Sony had the motion control thing since the Eye Toy if you don't remember that thing on the Playstation 2. Also the PS3 has Six Axis, although not very well implemented in any games and not used often, it's still motion control.

I'm sure that this has been answered before.

Ultra, hahaha, you definately don't win. if anything it's Hypr who has. You still cite no sources or have actual fact and support it in your previous two posts. If I could of found that quote you meantioned in the fourth question, that'd mean I'm citing a source you should of found, that's pretty sad, no?

Also kids don't have a short attention span when it comes to television based media. If you've been with a child for a while, you'd notice that they like to go "HEY LOOK AT THIS" and repeat it, over and over again, and often times repeat what the character said or act it out. I know some kids like to play Rock Band and ONLY play Eye Of The Tiger. They only have a short attention span when confronted about something they don't know or have any experience with. This is coming from personal experience with any kid, even my four kids are going to do this, just the same as I did and my sister did and how you probably did.

Anything is fun with people. Watch a bad movie, just because it's good because you're watching it with your friends and making fun of it, it doesn't mean that it's a good movie. Same goes with video games. Go play a terrible single player game with your friends, I guarentee that it'd be fun.

Thanks for ignoring my post, by the way, the word value in your previous post can be replaced by appeal and vice versa and still have the same meaning.

Oh yeah, I just read your first post of the topic saying that hype means that a game is bad and that its loss of sales, long term, makes it a bad game. THEN YOU BRING UP BATMAN. Batman has been getting good scores across the board and the worst user review on that site is a 7. Also the game is being considered for Game of the Year award from some journalists.

Yes, of course, hype means that the game is going to be average or sub par, of course.

Valkyria Chronicles, It won many GotY awards for strategy, yet it still sold incredibly low, explain please. It even has a sequel coming out for the PSP and the devs said that there might be a third if the second one sells well (I don't think it will hapen ).

Dead Space. Great scores. Terrible sales. Some people place it as their GotY.

The past games I've mentioned have been briefly subjected to hype when their release dates came close, yet they still sold poorly. Despite rave reviews.

An amazing game can still be amazing without having to have long term sales. Sales is not indicative of the quality of the game, neither is hype. Hype doesn't suggest that the game is bad or good, it's only advertisement so that the game can sell and make a profit. Haze had hype behind it, and it still bombed, both critically and financially, it even put Free Radical out of business for a while. Mean while Dead Space or Valkyria Chronicles had hype, sold poorly, still got great reviews.

What I said was a contradiction, yes, but that's because it's stupid to say that hype makes the game bad or good, because there's too many variables for there to be a general statement.

You are making up things, and you are wrong, because no system is better than the other. Yet you've chosen to argue against that. Very smart, because you are able to change someone's opinion about something they like. It doesn't help that your debating skills are lacking factual evidence and isn't typed out in a cohesive way or grammatically correct. Even after Hypr showed that you don't do either.

 

Ultra,

If you had paid attention to the entire debate, you would know that I have already answered three of those questions in my other posts. Actually, for the second question, I have already presented counter-evidence that shows your question was false to begin with. That clearly indicates that you ignore your opponents' arguments and evidence in this debate in which, (I believe it's safe to say that I speak for everyone else but you regarding this), is insulting to people's intelligence.

As for your fourth question, it's an invalid question to ask due to lack of evidence of Microsoft and Sony "hating the motion controller".

And, you wondered why your question regarding marketing and entertaining kids was invalidated. As I already pointed out, if you had read my post thoroughly, you would know that your statements regarding marketing to children was invalid due to your cheap attempt on pulling the strawman fallacy upon my arguments. Just so you know, the minute your statement commits a logical fallacy and gets called upon, it is thrown out of debate.

Call me a "chicken" if you want, but you better be careful regarding hypocrisy. After all, didn't you say something about "people using labels when they are stuck in a corner"?

Also, how many times have you labeled people like me, Natewlie, and ASD789 as "hardcores"? Wasn't that action the very thing you despised? And given that you have labeled us as "hardcores", doesn't that also indicate that you have already backed yourself into a corner as well?

Enjoy your food for thought. And you better finish up eating that crow I prepared for you. It's getting cold, just like your bitter taste of defeat.

 

While nintendo still hasn't strayed away from "making it for the families" they are still in it for the sales.

Just as Nat said