PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale

[zeothedeathgod]

---

musicfreaklam wrote:

---

zeothedeathgod wrote:

---

JesseCasco wrote:
It's selling alright now, but a lot of people are waiting until Christmas to actually buy the game. So sales should boost in a few weeks.

---

i know lol, but still idk if itll affect it that much, i love superbot, i love sony, and i love this game, it just doesnt look good right now :/

---

Also, that figure of 175,000 is confirmed to just be physical copies only.  Only Sony knows how many digital copies have been sold

---

really? thats not too bad than lol, i heard it was combined sales

[musicfreaklam]

---

zeothedeathgod wrote:

---

musicfreaklam wrote:

---

zeothedeathgod wrote:

---

JesseCasco wrote:
It's selling alright now, but a lot of people are waiting until Christmas to actually buy the game. So sales should boost in a few weeks.

---

i know lol, but still idk if itll affect it that much, i love superbot, i love sony, and i love this game, it just doesnt look good right now :/

---

Also, that figure of 175,000 is confirmed to just be physical copies only.  Only Sony knows how many digital copies have been sold

---

really? thats not too bad than lol, i heard it was combined sales

---

Yup!  Someone would have to literally ask Sony or one of it's internal companies how many digital copies of a specific game were sold

[achus93again]

kind of a refreshing news, since this year all i've heard from dev news are lay offs....

[dragonfire111]

---

Colton360 wrote:
No worldwide. We still have japan goddamnit

---

without any JRPG reps i doubt itll do well over there

[khailcon]

It could also just mean that Sony is insulating them, hoping to break a profit on DLC and a sequel down the line. 

[S-o-h-a-i-l]

khalicon, that makes no sense. If they're not making money off the game, why would that warrant hiring more people for DLC that only a few people will buy & a sequel to an unsuccessful game ?

Also, vgchartz is very unreliable for sales figures. As for this news, I think it's great that chances for a sequel are looking good, I'm sure they'll be able to solve a lot of problems by then & with a larger team and an already established engine/design, they have more time to spend on expanding. Lets just hope it's for the next gen.

[khailcon]

---

S-o-h-a-i-l wrote:
khalicon, that makes no sense. If they're not making money off the game, why would that warrant hiring more people for DLC that only a few people will buy & a sequel to an unsuccessful game ?

Also, vgchartz is very unreliable for sales figures. As for this news, I think it's great that chances for a sequel are looking good, I'm sure they'll be able to solve a lot of problems by then & with a larger team and an already established engine/design, they have more time to spend on expanding. Lets just hope it's for the next gen.

---

1. Sony is a large company and they are known for taking long term high-risk-high-reward investments. Examples: PS3, Bluray. They also insulate companies like Insomniac. Sony also invests in smaller companies like "That Game Company" and "Giant Sparrow." There was no guarantee that either of those companies would turn a profit. 

2. Sequels always do better

3. PS4

4. Hiring more people for building a sequel and releasing dlc in a timely fashion is a good move, regardless if the game is making money. 

5. Sony already spent a ton building a company from the ground up just for this game. They are heavily invested already. Why not absorb a loss if that means making it back down the line? Other companies do this. Look at  the "Fresh n Easy" produce chain in the United States. They haven't turned a profit in the five years they've been in business, but the larger corporation funding them was banking on breaking even by the end of next year. 

It does make sense. I am far from saying that All-Stars is a market failure, but that doesn't mean that its silly to consider it. 

[S-o-h-a-i-l]

What I mean is, why would they pay more people to create DLC for a game that they believe is under performing. The team themselves can carry on making DLC without Sony having to invest. As for hiring people to make a sequel, for a game released for less then a month, I doubt they'd begin development on a sequel if the original wasn't performing to the potential they anticipated.

[khailcon]

---

S-o-h-a-i-l wrote:
What I mean is, why would they pay more people to create DLC for a game that they believe is under performing. The team themselves can carry on making DLC without Sony having to invest. As for hiring people to make a sequel, for a game released for less then a month, I doubt they'd begin development on a sequel if the original wasn't performing to the potential they anticipated.

---

I already addressed all your points. I'm not going to spell out my argument again.

[JLP_M]

I'm sure it sold more then what people are saying. I'm just happy I got two of my friends to buy the game.