I AM WAR!
Anyway, with the sales thing. It's like comparing Fire Emblem with Final Fantasy when you're doing that with DmC and God of War. For DmC and Fire Emblem 1 million/500 thousand in sales I guess would be great if not exceptional. But for God of War and Final Fantasy, 1 million would be good or all right. Not every game is the same, if it were, than every game would be selling around 2-6 million. But they're not and when companies set high sales figures and fails or reduces it. It's not because the game is utter trash, but because not everyone likes or is interested in it. Darksiders 2 had a 4 million sales target, why? Because THQ was going down under and Darksiders 2 was its last hope despite the fact that Darksiders 2 is not of say Mass Effect 3 caliber in popularity.
Capcom knew that DmC: Devil May Cry and the DMC series isn't that popular compared to Mass Effect, God of War, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Borderlands, etc. And they knew considering the past patterns of DMC game sales that it wasn't going to be that great or stable. But what they know is that DMC4 when it came out, many people didn't have Xbox 360s or PS3s or PCs capable of playing it, but now people do and they are sort of tired of this generation. And the game was supposed to target new people. So they set a somewhat ambitious but also somewhat humble sales target. It's not like they were setting a 6 million sales target and boast that DmC would be
"the greatest game ever", as in no other game, Call of Duty, Final Fantasy, Persona, Metal Gear, Zelda, Mario, Metroid, or what-have-you will rival this game. No, it'll just be a Devil May Cry game that sells well.
Ni No Kuni because of what it was as a new IP and it was made more with an Eastern mindset (I think) had a lower sales target. Does it suck? No, and neither do games like Shadows of the Damned, Catherine, the Last Story, Xenoblade Chronicles, Fire Emblem, etc. It's just that the companies didn't think it would sell well. Guess what? It did, and some of those games were sold out or sold exceptionally well for what the companies thought. Other times, it didn't sell well or just barely broke even for them.
Same thing with games with a lower price than the most games; Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time, PSN, Xbox Live, digital only games, Ratchet & Clank: Full Frontal Assault, etc. They just have a low price compared to other games, maybe because they were fortunate enough to be able to produce such games without having to deal with high development costs like Crysis, Bioshock, Metal Gear, Gears of War, Halo, etc. Seriously, the moment Sony announced that Sly 4 would be $39.99, some people jumped ship on USS This-Game-Sucks-Because-It-Is-Priced-Low. And then you have games like Generic Shooter 583 priced at $59.99 and people buy it like it's going to rot when in reality the game isn't all that special.
Like buying anything in the world. Price sometimes means nothing. You can buy that $50,000 German imported Audi and find out it runs just as well as a Chevrolet Cruze for under $20,000. Why? 'Cause you're an average driver, not some performance junkie. I mean seriously, why the hell do people buy big-ass Hummers, SUVs, pick-up trucks, and mini-vans when only one or two of them are driving without any other passengers?! It's a freaking van! It's made for more 6-8 people god damn it! Just because its price high or you have the money doesn't mean it's great and that you should buy it.
32GB of RAM. Seriousy? Seriously?! Seriously . . . Or two-way SLI or Crossfire with nVidia's or AMD's currently most powerful graphics cards; GTX 680/690 and HD Radeon 7970. You seriously do not need that much power. Or people who buy prebuilt Core i5, 16GB RAM, 1-2TB office PCs for home. You don't need that much power and it's a rip off. It's not that hard to build a computer. If anything it's like LEGOs.
Yay . . . Ranting.
