wiiisawesome
Brawl, Galaxy, ftw!
Belmont said:
Ahh...I see...I guess I'll just have to wait until Corruption comes out..I bet it'll be cool..I love all first-party titles!
Metroid Prime 3 VS Halo 3
- Thread starter PaperLuigi
- Start date
Ahh...I see...I guess I'll just have to wait until Corruption comes out..I bet it'll be cool..I love all first-party titles!
Belmont
WiiChat Member
yeah you should go buy the first two to get caught up on the story and because they are awesome. the first one is the best of the two but the second is worth playing
wiiisawesome
Brawl, Galaxy, ftw!
Oh ok, so what platforms did they come out on?
Belmont
WiiChat Member
gamecube so if you own a wii am sure you know you can play them in that.
Belmont
WiiChat Member
well it takes alot of time. and its easy to get lost but if you see it through its worth it... but if you dont have time make sure you at least read the story
Wiinter
Audentes fortuna iuvat
- Apr 20, 2007
- 737
- 28
- Wii Online Code
- 8745-5143-2651-5351
Belmont said:
If you mean MP2, one of my concerns is that I read the ammo system was poorly thought out. I'd hate to get started playing it and end up banging my head against an oversight like that for the rest of the game.
Belmont
WiiChat Member
nah i didn't have a problem with the ammo system. I mean its not like your normal FPS where the ammo is abundant you have to conserve but once you get far enough into the game you don't even have to worry about that so i would not worry about it
Shadow20074
Saviour of Hyrule
i have played the halo 3 multiplayer beta, and i have to say for multi player halo 3 will be much much better, but for story and single player, it has to be metroid 
, most people buy halo for the multiplayer aspects...
, most people buy halo for the multiplayer aspects...
Funky Gibbon
The Iodine In Your Coffe
- May 16, 2007
- 90
- 3
- Wii Online Code
- 3925-8629-5403-6151
Wiinter
Lets assume for a moment that you're placing yourself in the category of those who have an opinion "supported with meaningful facts".
Exactly which statistical method did you use to adjust those figures to ones that "make more sense"? Can you provide your data sets, working & sources so that i can verify the data and calculations?
I suspect you have merely chosen figures that you believe make "more sense" (1:100 for console and 1:1000 for vista). There are many names for this including, but not limited to assumption, conjecture or speculation. However i doubt it can be referred to as a meaningful fact.
Seriously how you can start that whole paragraph off with the phrase "Real Figures" is beyond me. What makes these figures real? Its nothing more than conjecture!
Now lets move onto the sources that you have used and examine both the data they supply and the conclusion you have drawn from them.
Source 1 - Tech.co.uk - data provided is the total number of Vista sales thus far. First data set is for worldwide sales.
Source 2 - the-magicbox.com - data provide is the number of sales of Metroid Prime in the U.S. Second data set is for one country.
Source 3 - xe360.com - data provided is allegedly the number of pre-orders for Halo 3. They have supposedly verified this data by looking at five locations in the Greater Cincinnati area. (data sampled from one greater metropolitan area, then inflated to meet a figure of 4 million)
The three data sets have different sampling bases (worldwide, single country and metropolitan area) and are therefore incomparable with each other. So when using them as a basis for your own figures how did you reconcile this? Can i see your data, working, methodology and sources please?
Your third source is the most interesting as the figures they give cannot be verified in anyway "however company a document showing this information was not revealed." (quoted directly, including grammatical error).
Also quoted "In the coming months, if this information is verified"' if they doubt the veracity of this data in the first place then how did they manage to verify it? Also how did they manage to take a sample of five places in one greater metropolitan area and correct it up to 4 million for the total number of pre-orders???
You acknowledged in your post that the 4 million is a "supposed figure", however if it is a "supposed figure" then how can justify using the figure as a basis for your own calculation of 7-15 million? Is this really what you mean by "supported with meaningful facts"?
Lets take your own figure of 7-15 million, the mean is 11 million, so either side of the mean you have a margin of error of 4 million. That's a total margin of error in the region of 53%, a fairly large margin of error by anyones standards. Is a figure with such a large margin of error meaningful, factual or real?
Speculation on games is not a waste of time, that's not what I am saying at all. What i object to is your attempt to argue that your own speculation is "supported with meaningful facts" and is by inference a meaningful fact in itself (i.e. its more than conjecture).
As far as i can see your contention is based on unreliable data and unverifiable calculations and has no more or less merit than any other opinion. It is speculation only.
Regards
Funky Gibbon
Wiinter said:
Lets assume for a moment that you're placing yourself in the category of those who have an opinion "supported with meaningful facts".
Wiinter said:
Exactly which statistical method did you use to adjust those figures to ones that "make more sense"? Can you provide your data sets, working & sources so that i can verify the data and calculations?
I suspect you have merely chosen figures that you believe make "more sense" (1:100 for console and 1:1000 for vista). There are many names for this including, but not limited to assumption, conjecture or speculation. However i doubt it can be referred to as a meaningful fact.
Seriously how you can start that whole paragraph off with the phrase "Real Figures" is beyond me. What makes these figures real? Its nothing more than conjecture!
Now lets move onto the sources that you have used and examine both the data they supply and the conclusion you have drawn from them.
Source 1 - Tech.co.uk - data provided is the total number of Vista sales thus far. First data set is for worldwide sales.
Source 2 - the-magicbox.com - data provide is the number of sales of Metroid Prime in the U.S. Second data set is for one country.
Source 3 - xe360.com - data provided is allegedly the number of pre-orders for Halo 3. They have supposedly verified this data by looking at five locations in the Greater Cincinnati area. (data sampled from one greater metropolitan area, then inflated to meet a figure of 4 million)
The three data sets have different sampling bases (worldwide, single country and metropolitan area) and are therefore incomparable with each other. So when using them as a basis for your own figures how did you reconcile this? Can i see your data, working, methodology and sources please?
Your third source is the most interesting as the figures they give cannot be verified in anyway "however company a document showing this information was not revealed." (quoted directly, including grammatical error).
Also quoted "In the coming months, if this information is verified"' if they doubt the veracity of this data in the first place then how did they manage to verify it? Also how did they manage to take a sample of five places in one greater metropolitan area and correct it up to 4 million for the total number of pre-orders???
Wiinter said:
You acknowledged in your post that the 4 million is a "supposed figure", however if it is a "supposed figure" then how can justify using the figure as a basis for your own calculation of 7-15 million? Is this really what you mean by "supported with meaningful facts"?
Lets take your own figure of 7-15 million, the mean is 11 million, so either side of the mean you have a margin of error of 4 million. That's a total margin of error in the region of 53%, a fairly large margin of error by anyones standards. Is a figure with such a large margin of error meaningful, factual or real?
Wiinter said:
Speculation on games is not a waste of time, that's not what I am saying at all. What i object to is your attempt to argue that your own speculation is "supported with meaningful facts" and is by inference a meaningful fact in itself (i.e. its more than conjecture).
As far as i can see your contention is based on unreliable data and unverifiable calculations and has no more or less merit than any other opinion. It is speculation only
.Regards
Funky Gibbon
Wiinter
Audentes fortuna iuvat
- Apr 20, 2007
- 737
- 28
- Wii Online Code
- 8745-5143-2651-5351
@ Funky
First, "Real figures" was meant to be a relative comparative--to understand it's meaning as a header, you must read the figures, given by someone who disagreed with me. I'm willing to grant you that the header should have read "more realistic figures" instead, but in no way apparent or otherwise was I claiming (and this is obvious in context) that that would be the actual adoption rates.
Now, you're looking at opinions and saying, AHA! that's not a fact. You're looking at facts and critiquing them as not facts, without recognizing them for what they are. Again, an opinion that has support, however much or little, in a fact (however light) is not pure supposition. See examples of the two at the end.
For instance, the alleged (and thusly quoted) 4 million Halo pre-order IS a fact. It does not mean that 4 million copes of Halo 3 have been pre-ordered, nor was it cited to support that idea. It does mean that the gamestop is reporting that record number of pre-orders, and that it's likely accurate within a certain margin of error. Even assuming, for the purposes of not overplaying a fairly fuzzy fact, that they're off by half (it's not that fuzzy, but let's err on the side caution), that means that 4 months before the game's release, there are 2 million preorders. It doesn't mean everything, but it doesn't mean nothing either. The odds are very good that Halo 3 will record more sales by it's release date than the most popular Xbox 360 title, Gears of War, has since inception.
What does that mean? Well, compare it to the reception of Halo 2. How much better the reception is still remains to be seen--and since you're obssessed with precise figures, it can't be seen at all. However actual solid signs indicate that it will be vastly more popular over it's lifetime. Further the install base of the Xbox 360 + Vista indicates that it will have a larger possible audience.
You seem to think that because there is wiggle room in the facts presented, that there are no facts. Indeed, there is a great deal of wiggle room. But what it would take for these facts to undermine the basic assertion of Halo selling better than it's predecessors is so great, that if it were to happen it would be obvious by now--meaning the level of certainty goes up every day the world doesn't dissolve into nuclear war.
Examples:
Pure supposition: Master Chief is gay
I have nothing to base that on. It is only opinion (and an example, personally I respect his privacy and have no actual opinion on his orientation) and is not based on which of several ways he checks his nails or heels for dirt, for instance.
Opinion based (however loosely) on facts (that ultimately carry an acknowledged margin of error): Halo 3 will outsell Halo 2 by a lot. So much, that even if MP3 outsells it's own predecessors by a lot, it can't possibly catch up.
I'm not claiming to have written a well-sourced research paper on the subject. But what I have done is fundamentally different from pulling claims out of my colon. It is my thesis (opinion) that these very successful, system flag-bearing franchises like Halo and Metroid have reasons for their ultimate success in sales that are divorced from their actual quality AND that their actual quality by this stage is virtually guaranteed by the exposure the games had already gotten (any indications of their weaknesses would have exposed them to a much higher standard of critique much sooner than other franchises). Based on past sales compared to past install bases and current sales indicators and excitement, broad claims can be made with a high degree of accuracy.
First, "Real figures" was meant to be a relative comparative--to understand it's meaning as a header, you must read the figures, given by someone who disagreed with me. I'm willing to grant you that the header should have read "more realistic figures" instead, but in no way apparent or otherwise was I claiming (and this is obvious in context) that that would be the actual adoption rates.
Now, you're looking at opinions and saying, AHA! that's not a fact. You're looking at facts and critiquing them as not facts, without recognizing them for what they are. Again, an opinion that has support, however much or little, in a fact (however light) is not pure supposition. See examples of the two at the end.
For instance, the alleged (and thusly quoted) 4 million Halo pre-order IS a fact. It does not mean that 4 million copes of Halo 3 have been pre-ordered, nor was it cited to support that idea. It does mean that the gamestop is reporting that record number of pre-orders, and that it's likely accurate within a certain margin of error. Even assuming, for the purposes of not overplaying a fairly fuzzy fact, that they're off by half (it's not that fuzzy, but let's err on the side caution), that means that 4 months before the game's release, there are 2 million preorders. It doesn't mean everything, but it doesn't mean nothing either. The odds are very good that Halo 3 will record more sales by it's release date than the most popular Xbox 360 title, Gears of War, has since inception.
What does that mean? Well, compare it to the reception of Halo 2. How much better the reception is still remains to be seen--and since you're obssessed with precise figures, it can't be seen at all. However actual solid signs indicate that it will be vastly more popular over it's lifetime. Further the install base of the Xbox 360 + Vista indicates that it will have a larger possible audience.
You seem to think that because there is wiggle room in the facts presented, that there are no facts. Indeed, there is a great deal of wiggle room. But what it would take for these facts to undermine the basic assertion of Halo selling better than it's predecessors is so great, that if it were to happen it would be obvious by now--meaning the level of certainty goes up every day the world doesn't dissolve into nuclear war.
Examples:
Pure supposition: Master Chief is gay
I have nothing to base that on. It is only opinion (and an example, personally I respect his privacy and have no actual opinion on his orientation) and is not based on which of several ways he checks his nails or heels for dirt, for instance.
Opinion based (however loosely) on facts (that ultimately carry an acknowledged margin of error): Halo 3 will outsell Halo 2 by a lot. So much, that even if MP3 outsells it's own predecessors by a lot, it can't possibly catch up.
I'm not claiming to have written a well-sourced research paper on the subject. But what I have done is fundamentally different from pulling claims out of my colon. It is my thesis (opinion) that these very successful, system flag-bearing franchises like Halo and Metroid have reasons for their ultimate success in sales that are divorced from their actual quality AND that their actual quality by this stage is virtually guaranteed by the exposure the games had already gotten (any indications of their weaknesses would have exposed them to a much higher standard of critique much sooner than other franchises). Based on past sales compared to past install bases and current sales indicators and excitement, broad claims can be made with a high degree of accuracy.
gamer_of_life
Banned
- May 9, 2007
- 80
- 11
halo 3 = mainstream gamers
prime 3 = hardcore gamers
winner: halo 3.
prime 3 = hardcore gamers
winner: halo 3.
Sparticus9090
Wow... Wow... just... Wow
i like Halo 3, its just a bettere game in my opinion because it has a better multiplayer, and i only play halo really for the multiplayer, also halo 3 has xbox live to support it.
Jay61
WiiChat Member
- Mar 25, 2007
- 934
- 36
- Wii Online Code
- 4116-4612-5453-3059
How does that make it a better game though...thats just the one element of the game. The Metroid one player DESTROYS the Halo one, where as the Halo multiplayer DESTROYS Metroid one (sept on the DS because thats way better in my opinion).
Jay61 said:
To be honest, i've always thought Halo single player was better by far than metroid prime. Going out and taking on army after army of covenant, flood ect with a multitude of weapons, advanced enemy AI and in truly massive environments, filled with bad ass vechicles.
Beats walking round ships blowing up goo filled monsters anyday.
Plus Halo has co-op.
Just my opinion though.
