- 14,434
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
What's fishy about them? What reviews aren't fishy, then?They want to deem my review unreliable while holding value giving credit to these "fishy" Amazon reviews
What's fishy about them? What reviews aren't fishy, then?They want to deem my review unreliable while holding value giving credit to these "fishy" Amazon reviews
I see the source of your confusion. You're imputing a negative motion onto some people because you think they are dissing your game and your superficial review. You're taking it personally. No to the bolded part. Look at the other sales figures. Given the huge amount of front end loading in video game sales it would have been utterly shocking, as in earth shattering, had a game with the budget and market familiarity of GT not reached number one. The discussion around the reviews has nothing to do with people being unhappy GT reached number one and everything to do with thinking that the poor review scores do not bode well for the long term viability of this new concept. Early sales are influenced greatly by the historical performance of a title and marketing. Long term performance is more dictated by gameplay and market reception after launch. Early bad reviews can kill a game in the long run but some games or series have the ability to overcome that simply because they stick to the same tried and true formula with better graphics and more features. COD comes to mind.Did those high week one sales in japan resulted in a very high number of negative reviews from misinformed amazon customers?!? Did these consumers have access to social media to learn more about the game prior to purchasing?!?
Did Amazon represent the largest % of week 1 sales in Japan?!?
I think reviews are not held at high standards and only serve as a guide to help similar people get an insight about the game. I don't think reviews should be used to trickle moods, change the rate of potential sales and force game companies to change development decisions. Also, I don't think my 10/10 review score of Gran Turismo Sport on meteoritic caused this massive #1 week sales in Japan but it is obvious that some here do not appreciate this. They want to deem my review unreliable while holding value giving credit to these "fishy" Amazon reviews.
What I get from all this is that people are not happy that Gran Turismo Sport reached #1 sales in Japan for the week.
I see the source of your confusion. You're imputing a negative motion onto some people because you think they are dissing your game and your superficial review. You're taking it personally. No to the bolded part. Look at the other sales figures. Given the huge amount of front end loading in video game sales it would have been utterly shocking, as in earth shattering, had a game with the budget and market familiarity of GT not reached number one. The discussion around the reviews has nothing to do with people being unhappy GT reached number one and everything to do with thinking that the poor review scores do not bode well for the long term viability of this new concept. Early sales are influenced greatly by the historical performance of a title and marketing. Long term performance is more dictated by gameplay and market reception after launch. Early bad reviews can kill a game in the long run but some games or series have the ability to overcome that simply because they stick to the same tried and true formula with better graphics and more features. COD comes to mind.
We worry that the game is not going to do well in the market after a week or two, with lots of returns, people picking up used instead of new copies and it turning into a budget title pretty quickly. Bundling through the holiday season will artificially inflate the sales no doubt but maybe less so in the past given the critical reception the game has received. What does all this mean for long term support? Will it affect DLC levels? Will it mean PD goes to work on a title that's more like a GT7 vs. GTS2 sooner rather than later, drawing resources away from this game? We don't know because this is foreign territory for this franchise.
The sales numbers are not clearly positive, now if the were close to GT5 numbers I would agree, but they far closer to the numbers of the lowest initially performing GT title in recent history.Its' true, I think GT Sport is a really good game. If we take it at face value not determined by its history we would not have to deal with controversial game having "fishy" reviews imo. I am not convinced all these negative reviewers were actually misinformed about whats in the game. I believe that many predetermined the action to wipe dirt on GT Sport because they knew beforehand that the game was not going to be what they wanted to be. I believe their intentions were to manipulate GT Sport's sales forecast. Some unhappy reviewers seem to want GT Sport to go on sale at a discount quickly in hopes for them to lose revenue. I do feel it as a personal attack when being attacked by those who are unhappy with the positive sales numbers in efforts to suppress my positive mood on GT Sport, I can't help but wonder are these the same people who are responsible for some of those Amazon reviews?!?
While predictions are not always true, based on this factor I predict positive sales numbers for weeks to come.
The GTS website isn't even consistent on the content, nor does it make it clear at all that the traditional GT Model was gone.That's quite an overstatement though. Most information available before the release of the game pointed towards a game centered on the online experience. Yes, there is one 5 second clip from Malaysia where Kaz says that only 15% of the game is online (which is a very vague statement, how is that even measured?), but everything else pointed massively towards a game without a traditional career mode, with a smaller car and track list than what we're used to from past titles, and an e-sports focus.
If this was a brand new IP I would agree with you 100%, but it's not.Sure, people who don't follow sim racing might have missed the news (just like they also would have missed the 15% quote), but if you don't do at least a minimum amount of research before buying a game you can't really blame the studio or the publisher.
Which part of his post was wrong?Wrong. It was made clear from the start. I'm sure you don't remember that though, since your only interest in Gran Turismo seems to be to complain about it.
There's no doubt some of the reviews are contrived. It's not an all or nothing thing however, you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. When many reviews come from verified purchasers you're basically suggesting that they wasted $70 just to be able to put up one bad review out of hundreds. That stretches the bounds of credibility. You're also suggesting a worldwide conspiracy. Reviews in Asia, Europe and North America are all saying basically the same things. So either there's widespread agreement among many fans that the game has serious shortcomings in their eyes or there's a worldwide conspiracy amongst gamers to downvote this game for some nefarious reason. Which sounds more likely?Its' true, I think GT Sport is a really good game. If we take it at face value not determined by its history we would not have to deal with controversial game having "fishy" reviews imo. I am not convinced all these negative reviewers were actually misinformed about whats in the game. I believe that many predetermined the action to wipe dirt on GT Sport because they knew beforehand that the game was not going to be what they wanted to be. I believe their intentions were to manipulate GT Sport's sales forecast. Some unhappy reviewers seem to want GT Sport to go on sale at a discount quickly in hopes for them to lose revenue. I do feel it as a personal attack when being attacked by those who are unhappy with the positive sales numbers in efforts to suppress my positive mood on GT Sport, I can't help but wonder are these the same people who are responsible for some of those Amazon reviews?!?
While predictions are not always true, based on this factor I predict positive sales numbers for weeks to come.
I think there is one thing we can take away from all this, GT:Sport seems to be the No Mans Sky of 2017.
Over-Promised and Under-Delivered
Looks pretty, Lacks content
Supposedly sets a new standard for gaming
No Mans Sky was panned right from the start, GT:Sport thus far is only doing slightly better based on nothing more than the history of the GT name.
You appear to not know what evolution means in that case.Nah, Gt Sport seems to be the evolution Gran Turismo of 2017.
Why September?Everything is promised from what Ive read about the game in September
YepLooks pretty,
Nopefull of different content
NopeSets the new standard for racing,
YepSport mode matches you with players with similar abilities
At what?Gran Turimo Sport does not provide the nostalgic feeling but is clearly the best in this generation.
The sales numbers are not clearly positive, now if the were close to GT5 numbers I would agree, but they far closer to the numbers of the lowest initially performing GT title in recent history.
That should be a concern for any publisher.
I think there is one thing we can take away from all this, GT:Sport seems to be the No Mans Sky of 2017.
Over-Promised and Under-Delivered
Looks pretty, Lacks content
Supposedly sets a new standard for gaming
No Mans Sky was panned right from the start, GT:Sport thus far is only doing slightly better based on nothing more than the history of the GT name.
You mean LOWER than GT6 in Japan and between GT6 and GT5P numbers in the UK you mean?Ghostrider, week 1 sales has reflected this, get over it.
Which part of his post was wrong?
If this was a brand new IP I would agree with you 100%, but it's not.
It's a series that's been running for two decades in which the core single player element of full price releases has not changed one bit.
Given that I can't agree that this is a consumer issue at all.
Sony and PD have spent 20 years building and re-enforcing a brand in the eyes of its audience, don't then blame the audience if that's what the expect from your brand.
As a matter of interest, what is the split between GT Sports physical and digital sales and how do the digital sales compare to GT5?
What the...? No man sky was overhyped as ****. PD delivered what they promised since the Copper box event. Scape, Photography, Livery Editor, better sound simulation, Sport mode, lobbies, Split screen, a good looking 60fps game, campaign that will teach the player to be a better driver, and over 150 cars is there in the full game. So tell me what did they over promised? Sport mode set standard in racing in console gaming. Give a racing game that has accessible, quick, fair matchmaking online racing mode without spending time looking for good race then?
Yes which part of his response to you was wrong as you posted?The one where he said that my post was wrong. Why do you ask?
Currently we have no idea, it may well have been massive and more than bridged any gap, but until numbers come out we will not know 100%.As a matter of interest, what is the split between GT Sports physical and digital sales and how do the digital sales compare to GT5?
PCARS2 sold well over a million copies and only has half the likes of a week old game? Sounds fishy right?im not sure if all the digital information is available to us.
I agree with you, most certainly. As a matter of fact, people do like GTSport.
here is some data from the playstation 4 console
current likes received from a few racing games as of today
Project cars----33.2k lifetime
Project 2 -------4.2k after one month
Driveclub-------125k lifetime
GTAV -----------1.89M lifetime
GTSport --------63.4k after one week!
Like Mc Hammer always say,
Why do you find it hard to accept!What I find hard to believe is that someone who played Gran Turismo so much in the past that they know what to expect from the series gets so hyped when they see a GT Sport ad that they decide to buy it as soon as they can - but they're not quite hyped enough to look for any information about the game, even though they most likely found out about it with plenty of time to spare before the release.
Currently we have no idea, it may well have been massive and more than bridged any gap, but until numbers come out we will not know 100%.
The sales numbers are not clearly positive, now if the were close to GT5 numbers I would agree, but they far closer to the numbers of the lowest initially performing GT title in recent history.
That should be a concern for any publisher.
Indeed they are, quite possibly because those UK sales figures don't track digital sales at all, which the author describes as "Because in the UK, we're not tracking digital sales, and it's gone beyond a farce.".
For example the article also states that these results show that Destiny 2's sales have fallen by 50% as well, because again digital sales are not included.
So as the author also says "But when it comes to how brands are performing, or how the overall market is developing, it's almost an irrelevance."
Physical sales are falling and digital sales are increasing, and these figures show only half of the story.
Physical sales are down in one country using less than a complete month for comparison. Your continued releasing of a tiny slice of data and making sweeping conclusions again reveals your agenda.
Balance of what? In the absence of massively overwhelmingly positive or negative data (eg. 400 units sold or 2.5 million units sold) these partial glimpses into sales offer nothing conclusive. One need only look at past data that has been posted and try to predict the sales outcomes that we know to be true. It doesn't work.Where's the balance?
So using your business model...
“PD Customer services meeting:
Memo to heads of department, don’t worry about any customer complaints they cannot be verified and therefore not trusted.
What a great job guys!
End of meeting, whos going for pint?”
Your argument is illogical.
Because I'm talking specifically about physical sales.So how can @Scaff say sales are clearly not positive (or negative for that matter) based on incomplete data. I'm simply repeating a point both he and you made before about the other title.
The comments from verified purchasers are from people they know have bought the title, how much more verification would you want?Well, would you trust some data you cannot verify?
Already explained it. In reference to this thread it has to do with the order of the words completely changing their meaning. Also, see above^^. In reference to my remarks on the other thread, at no point did I say sales were not clearly positive or negative or clearly positive or clearly negative. I said nothing of the sort. If you feel I did, please quote it.So how can @Scaff say sales are clearly not positive (or negative for that matter) based on incomplete data. I'm simply repeating a point both he and you made before about the other title.
Well, would you trust some data you cannot verify?
How does one go about complaining to PD? How is that then verified?
There isnt a mechanic in place for the customer to provide any feedback direct to PD, other than they can prove they bought it and they leave a review.
As such an amazon verified purchase.
As scaff said.
With regards to all the Facebook, Amazon, and anywhere else negative comments they shouldn’t be ignored because they can't be verified. This is the Gran Turismo brand that is being damaged, agree with it or not.
Such an awful way to try to discredit someone. You've been very vocal against those with these opinions, which is odd if you're going to turn around and essentially say "get over it, its just a video game."I think you are all taking this situation a bit to serious. I mean, it's a game, clear case of first world problem.
Because I'm talking specifically about physical sales.