Media Create reports Xbox Series sales are HALF what Famitsu has reported.

[Darth Vader]

That's not evidence for MC being more accurate than Famitsu.

Not in itself, no, which is why I added more arguments which you, of course, ignored

It does matter, since they're both accurate and thus your argument falls apart.

How are they both accurate if both show deviations in reported sales? Your argument falls apart because you cannot reconcile that Nintendo using publication X in detriment of publication Y + Nintendo being a publicly traded in the stock market = they need to provide accurate data that can be scrutinized.

Wrong, I never made such an argument. I said we can't tell which one is more accurate.

Media Create is over-reporting PS5 and under-reporting Xbox sales, as per Famitsu.

I wonder if Media Create is going to make a correction or explain their numbers

Wrong again.

Yeah, your whole argument has been based on it, but let's ignore this whole conversation and say "wrong again".

Again, Famitsu's Nintendo numbers are similar to MCs. So either both are credible or none are.

And you keep ignoring the whole argument chain. What you just said is besides the point. Nintendo choosing MC over Famitsu alone proves which of the two publications is more accurate, regardless of the numbers for both of them being similar in Nintendo's / Sony's case. And I know you understand this.

 

[Swift_Star]

That's not evidence for MC being more accurate than Famitsu.

It does matter, since they're both accurate and thus your argument falls apart.

Wrong, I never made such an argument. I said we can't tell which one is more accurate.

Wrong again.

Again, Famitsu's Nintendo numbers are similar to MCs. So either both are credible or none are.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Sales are small either way, who gives a flying fuck? lol

 

[azertydu91]

Nah, it's just that the "auert" shouldn't be in his nickname.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Not in itself, no, which is why I added more arguments which you, of course, ignored

How are they both accurate if both show deviations in reported sales? Your argument falls apart because you cannot reconcile that Nintendo using publication X in detriment of publication Y + Nintendo being a publicly traded in the stock market = they need to provide accurate data that can be scrutinized.

The deviations are tiny, so if one is accurate, the other is accurate too. Nintendo also does internal estimations to provide more accurate data.

That's me mirroring a non-argument. You can find my actual argument later on.

Yeah, your whole argument has been based on it, but let's ignore this whole conversation and say "wrong again".

Nope.

Nintendo choosing MC over Famitsu alone proves which of the two publications is more accurate, regardless of the numbers for both of them being similar in Nintendo's / Sony's case.

No, it simply doesn't.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I think framepacing and framerate issues are the least. What I saw was a janky copy of No Mans Sky that actually looked and ran worse. Also, let's not say 1000 planets is ambitious when the aforementioned NMS has pretty much an infinite amount of planets. That said, we'll see what those 1000 planets have.

Lol we already know most of those planets won't have anything besides resources to farm. Todd kind of came out and confirmed it himself.

So if you aren't needing to grind for materials, like almost 99% of those planets can seemingly be skipped. If the game doesn't have a system where missions are dynamic in terms of being inter-planetary and where the player can leverage different planets to their advantage, or something like that...then it's a waste.

Yeah, could be. Also, I think the problems with KOTOR Remake are more likely to do with creative direction, rather than development problems (unless I missed something).

KOTOR director submitted assets and shared the progress of the game developement and felt good about everything. Sony didn't like what they shared and asked to change the leadership (and, therefore, the direction of the game).

So the game was progressing well (barring the inevitable delay or two which is common in the industry), but Sony didn't think what they had was up to PlayStation's standards, so they are going to change the direction a bit and put more work into it.

True points. Very well could be another GOW 2018 situation and ultimately that gave a much better game than what was being shaped up beforehand. If Sony's involved I think they've earned the goodwill and cache to be trusted the game turns out great, it may just take a little longer than what was originally planned.

 

[Swolf712]

Again, Famitsu's Nintendo numbers are similar to MCs. So either both are credible or none are.

That's not at all how this works. Being "close" with some numbers does not automatically make a wild discrepancy in other numbers valid.

What this means is that one of them has what the industry itself considers to be a more credible metric that more closely resembles their own internal data tracking than the other. THIS is what lends MC credibility over Famitsu. Further, the worst that happens if Famitsu is wrong is they later say "whoops, we guessed wrong". If MC is off by that much, they LOSE business, people will stop paying them to track sales data. They have far more incentive to be VERY selective and accurate with their data. This is why people are saying MC is far more likely to be accurate with their sales data than Famitsu. They have far more incentive to be as accurate as humanly possible, as well as having the actual trust of major players in the industry who literally PAY them to track these things.

Getting one thing close to accurate doesn't invalidate a wild discrepancy. It rather calls into question the methods one used to gather the data that lead to such a wide discrepancy.

 

[Darth Vader]

That's not at all how this works. Being "close" with some numbers does not automatically make a wild discrepancy in other numbers valid.

What this means is that one of them has what the industry itself considers to be a more credible metric that more closely resembles their own internal data tracking than the other. THIS is what lends MC credibility over Famitsu. Further, the worst that happens if Famitsu is wrong is they later say "whoops, we guessed wrong". If MC is off by that much, they LOSE business, people will stop paying them to track sales data. They have far more incentive to be VERY selective and accurate with their data. This is why people are saying MC is far more likely to be accurate with their sales data than Famitsu. They have far more incentive to be as accurate as humanly possible, as well as having the actual trust of major players in the industry who literally PAY them to track these things.

Getting one thing close to accurate doesn't invalidate a wild discrepancy. It rather calls into question the methods one used to gather the data that lead to such a wide discrepancy.

Can I take a guess at Bernies "answer"?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

That's not at all how this works. Being "close" with some numbers does not automatically make a wild discrepancy in other numbers valid.

What this means is that one of them has what the industry itself considers to be a more credible metric that more closely resembles their own internal data tracking than the other. THIS is what lends MC credibility over Famitsu. Further, the worst that happens if Famitsu is wrong is they later say "whoops, we guessed wrong". If MC is off by that much, they LOSE business, people will stop paying them to track sales data. They have far more incentive to be VERY selective and accurate with their data. This is why people are saying MC is far more likely to be accurate with their sales data than Famitsu. They have far more incentive to be as accurate as humanly possible, as well as having the actual trust of major players in the industry who literally PAY them to track these things.

Getting one thing close to accurate doesn't invalidate a wild discrepancy. It rather calls into question the methods one used to gather the data that lead to such a wide discrepancy.

It's not one thing, they're close in every single thing but the Series X/S. They were also close in everything during the Xbone time. So yes, the discrepancy needs to be questioned, but for both MC and Famitsu.

Your incentive argument doesn't work because Famitsu also has an incentive to be accurate (web traffic).

 

[DonFerrari]

Yeah, agree. I don't think they did either.

I know there are certain boys here that want to believe it happened, but there is literally just one rumor from Imran Khan, and no one else reported it. But let's look at it from a logical POV:

• The 2020 rumor said that they tried getting Starfield as a timed exclusive but couldn't because of Microsoft. Means they'd have gotten, at best, a 2019 build to evaluate it. If the game looks this bad in 2022 in a vertical slice, imagine how awful it must have looked in 2019. Would they even have anything substantial to show back then, considering Jason's reports that they have been half-assing it for a while? I doubt it.
• Imran Khan said they got timed exclusives from every publisher. I don't see any timed exclusives from Ubisoft, Take Two, EA, Capcom, etc. Means the rumor was already false to begin with.
• They got Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo. What was stopping them for getting Starfield if they really wanted to? Microsoft? Don't fanboys say that Microsoft couldn't influence any decision before the acquisition? Whether they could influence or they couldn't: they gotta pick one

The idea being that what, Sony doesn’t moneyhat bad games? We know they moneyhat bad games, all the companies do. Also the difference between the two games Sony did get versus Starfield is one is from BGS and the other two aren’t. Tango and Arkane both have made great games for Bethesda but they are not on the success or impact of BGS titles and thus would be a lot harder to moneyhat. They were also a lot further along than Starfield.

 

[arvfab]

It's not one thing, they're close in every single thing but the Series X/S. They were also close in everything during the Xbone time. So yes, the discrepancy needs to be questioned, but for both MC and Famitsu.

Your incentive argument doesn't work because Famitsu also has an incentive to be accurate (web traffic).

Maybe they are both right, with the discrepancy being the number of Xbox consoles sitting on shelves.

 

[Swolf712]

It's not one thing, they're close in every single thing but the Series X/S. They were also close in everything during the Xbone time. So yes, the discrepancy needs to be questioned, but for both MC and Famitsu.

Your incentive argument doesn't work because Famitsu also has an incentive to be accurate (web traffic).

Yes, which is the entire point of contention. You can't simply say both were right about one thing which means both are thus valid about a set of numbers that vary wildly. And given one is actually used and trusted BY PLATFORM HOLDERS THEMSELVES and have access to data the other wouldn't, they are far, far more likely to be accurate than a web publication. The fact is, MC has sources that Famitsu does not, which is a huge part of WHY Nintendo and others trust them and pay for their services when it comes to data tracking. Same for NPD or GfK vs VGChartz.

And fam... web traffic? Web traffic is generated by clicks. Clicks are generated by a lot of means, including (but not limited to) sensationalism and controversy. Web traffic as an incentive to be truthful and accurate is not a great argument. That's not to say that Famitsu IS lying, but rather that this is a very weak form of logic.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

You can't simply say both were right about one thing which means both are thus valid about a set of numbers that vary wildly.

Never said that. One of them should be wrong since there's a big discrepancy.

And given one is actually used and trusted BY PLATFORM HOLDERS THEMSELVES and have access to data the other wouldn't, they are far, far more likely to be accurate than a web publication.

Trusted by Nintendo, yes. And Famitsu has very similar Nintendo numbers, which means they are also very accurate and definitely not less accurate than MC.

 

[Swolf712]

Never said that. One of them should be wrong since there's a big discrepancy.

Trusted by Nintendo, yes. And Famitsu has very similar Nintendo numbers, which means they are also very accurate and definitely not less accurate than MC.

Somehow there is this mental block that is simply not letting you get the point being made.

Famitsu's Nintendo numbers, while closer, are still off, for one. If Nintendo thought that they could trust Famitsu the same way they could MC, they would simply go by Famitsu and not pay MC for their services.

Both cannot be a reliable source for Xbox numbers if their numbers vary so wildly, and the fact that you're strongly trying to imply not only that the amateur trackers at Famitsu are more reliable than trained, professional data analysts with access to sources not available to the public, but even implying that they're actually MORE trustworthy, is a joke. That's really all I can say. You're not interested in a real conversation, but in a fantasy world where everything that conforms to your bias must be true, and anything that does not is wrong.

 

[Darth Vader]

Somehow there is this mental block that is simply not letting you get the point being made.

There's no mental block. He's just ignoring it on pourpose.

 

[DynamiteCop]

Somehow there is this mental block that is simply not letting you get the point being made.

Famitsu's Nintendo numbers, while closer, are still off, for one. If Nintendo thought that they could trust Famitsu the same way they could MC, they would simply go by Famitsu and not pay MC for their services.

Both cannot be a reliable source for Xbox numbers if their numbers vary so wildly, and the fact that you're strongly trying to imply not only that the amateur trackers at Famitsu are more reliable than trained, professional data analysts with access to sources not available to the public, but even implying that they're actually MORE trustworthy, is a joke. That's really all I can say. You're not interested in a real conversation, but in a fantasy world where everything that conforms to your bias must be true, and anything that does not is wrong.

Sure, yet you people trust famitsu habitually until you don't... regardless you both lose...

 

[Swolf712]

Sure, yet you people trust famitsu habitually until you don't... regardless you both lose...

"You people".

And who are my people, exactly?

 

[Darth Vader]

"You people".

And who are my people, exactly?

He thinks VGChartz is accurate. He's salty, let him be. Recent post history shows he can't cope.

 

[DynamiteCop]

He thinks VGChartz is accurate. He's salty, let him be. Recent post history shows he can't cope.

Dishonesty? That's cute.

 

[Papacheeks]

Sure, yet you people trust famitsu habitually until you don't... regardless you both lose...

Wait?