Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
FlareXV

Gravity Rush 2 may have sold under 5,000 copies in the UK (Physical)

89 posts in this topic

Promote more of the game by advertising so people would know about it, and put the game it was originally on the vita including on ps4 for the sequel. Those two will make a huge difference which I hate when Sony doesn't include a game that was originally on the vita for the longest where without releasing faithfully on what it was that helped mostly of the sales, then the next game that release on next gen only will fail of my view. 

Edited by Superstarmaste1r
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

There's so many things wrong with this I don't even know where to start. :P

 

There's nothing wrong with that. Arkham Knight was so big, it could never have been done on the PS3 without some seriois cuts.  I already said that in the rest of my previous post, but naturally you're just filtering out a single line to make fun of while ignoring the actual arguments that it's being followed with.

 

If you think every PS4 game can be done on PS3 just by lessening the graphics, then you are beyond reasoning.

Edited by BillyHorrible
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard great things about it but I don't like spending £40 on games anymore, in a month it'll be under £30. Plus I just bought a dozen or so games in the January sales. PLUS it's now behind Yakuza 0, Kingdom Hearts and Tales of Berseria on my wishlist from this month alone.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2017 at 0:27 PM, DaivRules said:

 

$120?! What? I sold my physical copy since I got it from Plus and was pretty hard up for cash at the time, but I know where I can scoop up copies for about $15, I'll buy them up and unload them for $120 for sure!

 

Lol check ebay.. it's absolutely absurd ... This only applies to the PS4 copy, not the vita.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BillyHorrible said:

There's nothing wrong with that.

 

Oh yeah? :P Well, to start off with, you said Rockstar and they had nothing to do with that game, so even if you truly believe in all that marketing speak, you can't deny that. :giggle: Also, I'm preeeeetty sure if Arkham Asylum and Arkham City ran on PS3 just fine, with some graphical downgrades, Arkham Knight would be just fine too. It's not like the game plays a whole lot differently. You should probably learn not to blindly believe what these devs/publishers tell you. They're known to spew bullshit in order to sell their game. Just look at No Man's Sky as a good example.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

Oh yeah? :P Well, to start off with, you said Rockstar and they had nothing to do with that game, so even if you truly believe in all that marketing speak, you can't deny that. :giggle: Also, I'm preeeeetty sure if Arkham Asylum and Arkham City ran on PS3 just fine, with some graphical downgrades, Arkham Knight would be just fine too. It's not like the game plays a whole lot differently. You should probably learn not to blindly believe what these devs/publishers tell you. They're known to spew bullshit in order to sell their game. Just look at No Man's Sky as a good example.

I could have sworn the main reason Arkham Knight couldn't be on PS3 was because of the Batmobile stuff and how big they wanted the city to be (it's 5x bigger then Arkham City's map)

Even with a graphical downgrade the load time would have been terrible and the game may have had more problem. Like what happened between the PS4 and PS3 versions of Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, soultaker655 said:

I could have sworn the main reason Arkham Knight couldn't be on PS3 was because of the Batmobile stuff and how big they wanted the city to be (it's 5x bigger then Arkham City's map)

Even with a graphical downgrade the load time would have been terrible and the game may have had more problem. Like what happened between the PS4 and PS3 versions of Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor.

 

I still find it hard to believe it wouldn't have been possible. Not worth the effort, sure, but certainly possible. We already had more impressive games on PS3 in terms of size and scope. Besides, this is Rocksteady we're talking about. They couldn't even get the PC version to work properly. I hardly think they're good "proof" of what is and isn't possible on hardware.

 

People seem to keep missing the point I was making. I'm not saying the game would have looked as good, loaded as fast, etc, as the PS4 version. All I'm saying is that gameplay hasn't evolved to a point where it simply couldn't be done on the previous generation. Every game that has released on PS4 are simply a prettier versions of games that were on PS3. Graphics get better, but gameplay has largely remained stagnant.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2017 at 0:27 PM, DaivRules said:

 

$120?! What? I sold my physical copy since I got it from Plus and was pretty hard up for cash at the time, but I know where I can scoop up copies for about $15, I'll buy them up and unload them for $120 for sure!

 

Yeah, I'm actually suspecting that the UK gaming public has been conditioned that EU regions get less physical releases and so there were significantly more digital sales than the rumored "maybe 5,000 physical" sales from this thread. Especially since Japans sales numbers show it's moved 75,000 there. Considering the big titles that released shortly before GR2 released that's pretty awesome numbers for it's first week.

 

No, Duck is wrong. Ive been following GRR from launch till I bought it in October 2016. It was $30 at highest in all true major selling places. Best Buy, Gamestop, and Amazon consistently had and has it at $30. The $120 must be some stupid ass Ebay thing, or the collectors or japanese "edition" versions. Otherwise, default physical and digital were $30 in those 3 places I just listed.

 

Side Note: Interesting how controversy this thread/game is.

Edited by Mar
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

I still find it hard to believe it wouldn't have been possible. Not worth the effort, sure, but certainly possible. We already had more impressive games on PS3 in terms of size and scope. Besides, this is Rocksteady we're talking about. They couldn't even get the PC version to work properly. I hardly think they're good "proof" of what is and isn't possible on hardware.

 

People seem to keep missing the point I was making. I'm not saying the game would have looked as good, loaded as fast, etc, as the PS4 version. All I'm saying is that gameplay hasn't evolved to a point where it simply couldn't be done on the previous generation. Every game that has released on PS4 are simply a prettier versions of games that were on PS3. Graphics get better, but gameplay has largely remained stagnant.

There's so much more to consider besides gameplay when you compare PlayStation 4 games to PlayStation 3 games. Even if you downgrade graphics you have to still consider stuff like frame rate, A.I processing, online Network infrastructure, and other stuff that differ from system to system.

 

You can go and compare quite a few of the PS3 and PS4 versions of certain games and you will see how somethings have been cut out or reduced. Plus sometimes the cost of making the downgraded version isn't really worth it, especially if it's been Outsourced to another developer. Eventually the costs of making the downgradeed version isn't worth it and development of the older generation versions stop. It happens every new console generation and then PS3 to PS4 generation is no different.

 

It's even worse for the ps3 because of how hard it was to port games from other systems to the ps3. 

 

Edited by soultaker655
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2017 at 9:10 PM, kuuhaku said:

It'd probably be higher if it released on the vita :ninja:

 

 

LMAO :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

Oh yeah? :P Well, to start off with, you said Rockstar and they had nothing to do with that game, so even if you truly believe in all that marketing speak, you can't deny that. :giggle: Also, I'm preeeeetty sure if Arkham Asylum and Arkham City ran on PS3 just fine, with some graphical downgrades, Arkham Knight would be just fine too. It's not like the game plays a whole lot differently. You should probably learn not to blindly believe what these devs/publishers tell you. They're known to spew bullshit in order to sell their game. Just look at No Man's Sky as a good example.

 

1 hour ago, soultaker655 said:

I could have sworn the main reason Arkham Knight couldn't be on PS3 was because of the Batmobile stuff and how big they wanted the city to be (it's 5x bigger then Arkham City's map)

Even with a graphical downgrade the load time would have been terrible and the game may have had more problem. Like what happened between the PS4 and PS3 versions of Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor.

 

1 hour ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

I still find it hard to believe it wouldn't have been possible. Not worth the effort, sure, but certainly possible. We already had more impressive games on PS3 in terms of size and scope. Besides, this is Rocksteady we're talking about. They couldn't even get the PC version to work properly. I hardly think they're good "proof" of what is and isn't possible on hardware.

 

People seem to keep missing the point I was making. I'm not saying the game would have looked as good, loaded as fast, etc, as the PS4 version. All I'm saying is that gameplay hasn't evolved to a point where it simply couldn't be done on the previous generation. Every game that has released on PS4 are simply a prettier versions of games that were on PS3. Graphics get better, but gameplay has largely remained stagnant.

 

I said the same thing soultaker did for three posts now: it's not just graphical but also the size of the game and the options. Undead however, finds it more funny to talk about my mistake of saying Rockstar instead of Rocksteady while he keeps ignoring the rest of my posts. Very mature stuff.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soultaker655 said:

There's so much more to consider besides gameplay when you compare PlayStation 4 games to PlayStation 3 games. Even if you downgrade graphics you have to still consider stuff like frame rate, A.I processing, online Network infrastructure, and other stuff that differ from system to system.

 

You can go and compare quite a few of the PS3 and PS4 versions of certain games and you will see how somethings have been cut out or reduced. Plus sometimes the cost of making the downgraded version isn't really worth it, especially if it's been Outsourced to another developer. Eventually the costs of making the downgradeed version isn't worth it and development of the older generation versions stop. It happens every new console generation and then PS3 to PS4 generation is no different.

 

It's even worse for the ps3 because of how hard it was to port games from other systems to the ps3. 

 

20 minutes ago, BillyHorrible said:

I said the same thing soultaker did for three posts now: it's not just graphical but also the size of the game and the options. Undead however, finds it more funny to talk about my mistake of saying Rockstar instead of Rocksteady while he keeps ignoring the rest of my posts. Very mature stuff.

 

And what I'm saying is clearly going over both of your heads... Say what you like, I'm done beating my head against this brick wall.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

And what I'm saying is clearly going over both of your heads... Say what you like, I'm done beating my head against this brick wall.

I get what you are saying, "That gameplay hasn't evolved to a point where it simply couldn't be done on the previous generation", but if you want to go with that line of thinking then what's the difference between the PS2 generation and the PS3 generation?

 

Gameplay of most games nowadays comes from the PS2 versions of those games. If the graphics and stuff in a PS3 game could be downgraded to work on a ps2 why didn't games like Uncharted, Last of Us, Dead Space, Dark Souls, ect.. have PS2 versions?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a shame that it sold poorly since it was a pretty fun game despite many shortcomings. I feel that Sony should've taken the time and money to advertise and promote it prior to release.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.