All I'm looking for is some cold, hard statistical data of some sort, showing how many copies were sold of each, but I cant seem to find it! I understand Black Ops is multi-platform and naturally will sell (or has sold) more copies than Reach. But if were just looking at the 360 for the projected month, who beats who? And how many total copies of Black Ops (all platforms) were/are projected to be sold? And Reach?
I would like to know this too, Black ops claimed to be the most anticipated game of the year but I thought Halo:Reach was. I didn't really anticipate either of them but I got them anyway, I would assume many Xbox players bought both games too so sales should be similar.
I know a guy that works at Gamestop. He said that there were many more Black Ops Preorders (for just the 360) than Reach preorders.
Well when I went to Wal-mart a week after Reach came out, they had piles of them laying around. I went to Wal-mart yesterday and they were completely sold out of Black Ops.
i hear slightly less people complaining after release that "bungee are a bunch of pushy snobs that dont have the soul of the game they made anymore, that everything past halo3 was horrible and they treat the game and gamers horrible"... than i hear of people complaining that "black ops didnt fix anything, did add anything new, broke even more things, and just added some retarded useless toy crap" doesnt game satisfaction matter more than sales? these statistics just prove that Black Ops ripped off more people and created a lot more hype than they deserved, than reach did (but proves that both made a ridiculous amount of unworthwhile hype). thus, MNC is all that matters :mrgreen:
As much as I agree with the last sentence, I have to say that people will complain about anything. Go look at the TF2 forums. They've been receiving free updates for 3 frakking years from VALVe. Approximately half of the topics there are bitching about one thing or another.
you should be able to tell the illegitimate complaints from the legitimate ones... the ump45 kills people in one shot across the map, is automatic and you can run faster than most other guns with it. would you agree thats balanced? i like it when people complain its realistic, when my shotgun pellets will magically disappear outside 6 meters range. anyone wana stand 12 meters in front of my shotgun? MW2 says that the bullets will disappear by then. besides, the shotgun doesnt do that much damage anyway, you wont die. and if you do, youll just respawn at your house, or the hospital, it will just affect your k/d ratio... hearing people talk about realistic, makes me think some people shouldnt be allowed to play video games rated over "E"
I think Halo is just one of those games that everyone has played for the most part and those who have played Halo 2 and went to 3 probably thought: "This is just like 2 with some different stuff." Then came COD4 and MW2 that are tops in the FPS. I just think people were more excited for COD and a lot were bored with Halo.
call me picky, but halo wasnt that good as far as stradegy and play-duration. modern warfare and its sequel are always strategic and always add a bunch of thoughtful stuff to the game (even if some of its broken, its the best game ever if i had a computer and played "no ump45 and/or smgs", mainly the ump45). this is the best game ever that functions fairly balanced on strategic combat game on xbox live. even has my favorite thing, a base defense objective. and c&c renegade was the most rounded game i ever played. mostly cuz lots was developed for it...
I would agree with that. I could never really get any teamwork going in Halo. Most of the time there are stupid kids playing just goofing and just want to call you names with a goal of irritation. COD is quite different for the most part. You will still get young people but there is a different feel to COD than Halo. COD is just more realistic.
