Hero-of-Time Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 The Conduit enters the charts.... The highest newcomer this week is Wii-exclusive The Conduit, which fails to spark much of a reaction at 29.
Hero-of-Time Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 The UK games chart http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/uk-charts-tiger-roars-to-top
BlueStar Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 This list has it debuting at 32 http://www.chart-track.co.uk/index.jsp?c=p/software/uk/latest/index_test.jsp&ct=110032 Madworld came in at what, 29? And was considered to have bombed?
Shino Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 Are these charts weekly or monthly? And does it really matter since it was released 3 days ago?
Hero-of-Time Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 Are these charts weekly or monthly? And does it really matter since it was released 3 days ago? The charts are weekly and yeah they are only 3 days old but alot of the time if titles dont break into the top 20 in the first few days then it probably won't. There are a few exceptions but I will be surprised if this is one of them.
dazzybee Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 It came 29 in the gam charts and 32 in the single unit chart - so Tiger Woods is one place in the game chart and three places in the single game chart. This is pretty disappointing but I expect it to go higher next week. On another note Tiger Woods sold best on Wii.
Retro_Link Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 On another note Tiger Woods sold best on Wii.Result! How's Grand Slam Tennis doing?
dazzybee Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 Stupidly well. It's selling better than all versions of tiger woods. Just not put together.
Emasher Posted July 13, 2009 Posted July 13, 2009 Its good to see the higher quality sports games doing well.
yesteryeargames Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 gamecentral 4/10 ? omg if anyone ever needed more evidence that they are pc and 360 fanboys here it is what utter bs. the game is worth at least 7/10 at the lowest. for shame on teletext
navarre Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 I passed on the opprtunity to buy this game. I'll probably try it out later. Maybe purchase a cheap second hand copy.
... Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Well, I read the last 4 or 5 pages diagonally, and I don't have the game, I'll pick it up maybe a few months from now cheaper, if I deem it worth it. But the impression I get from most of the comments I read is that the problem with this game is that it just came too late. This game (or one like this) should have come at launch, and not Red Steel. That way, today we'd have (maybe) top notch games being released. The Conduit is sort of a new begining, and like all new beginings, it's not perfect. But now is too late for a new begining, it should have been back in 2006/7.
mcj metroid Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 that's a shame about the sales.. It clearly desr]erved to sell better than this and I thought it would at least outdo madoworld.. But I haven't seen any advertising for it yet
Emasher Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Well, I read the last 4 or 5 pages diagonally, and I don't have the game, I'll pick it up maybe a few months from now cheaper, if I deem it worth it. But the impression I get from most of the comments I read is that the problem with this game is that it just came too late. This game (or one like this) should have come at launch, and not Red Steel. That way, today we'd have (maybe) top notch games being released. The Conduit is sort of a new begining, and like all new beginings, it's not perfect. But now is too late for a new begining, it should have been back in 2006/7. It would have worked out better back then, but its not like this is Nintendo trying to change the perception of the console. Its a small developer who finally got the funds to make their game, and it looks like it will pay off for them, not just with The Conduit, but now that they have the Quantum 3 engine, their other projects will be a lot easier, and they might be able to now turn into a proper developer rather than just a shovelware developer. You can't really blame HVS or SEGA for timing. But I do think Nintendo should have been paying to have more of this sort of game being developed for the system before it came out. that's a shame about the sales.. It clearly desr]erved to sell better than this and I thought it would at least outdo madoworld.. But I haven't seen any advertising for it yet You say that, but I thought you weren't going to buy it. I haven't seen any adds either, I thought SEGA said they were going to be giving it a decent marketing campaign.
mcj metroid Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 You say that, but I thought you weren't going to buy it. I haven't seen any adds either, I thought SEGA said they were going to be giving it a decent marketing campaign. hey If i wanted an average overhyped shooter i'd buy halo:awesome:.. No i'm not going to get it.. I would have ignored the repetitive story complaints if it had a proper multiplayer mode... but not a half a multiplayer mode(ie no split,local)... just means no really. gamecentral 4/10 ? omg if anyone ever needed more evidence that they are pc and 360 fanboys here it is what utter bs. the game is worth at least 7/10 at the lowest. for shame on teletext they've always been bitchy with reviews though. you'd think they're edge or something.
Emasher Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 I see what you mean, but barely anything has split screen now. Its sad, but most of us will end up playing online more anyway.
Goron_3 Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Gamecentral aren't fanboys at all, infact they've actually showed favouritism to Nintendo in the past. They're easily the most reliable reviewers.
dazzybee Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Gamecentral aren't fanboys at all, infact they've actually showed favouritism to Nintendo in the past. They're easily the most reliable reviewers. What a load of bullshit. How are any reviewers classed as reliable? What a ridiculous thing to say. I've played the game and it's not a 4, so they're not bloody reliable for me are they? ULtimately, in subjective opinion; you need to find the people who closely follow your tastes, whether thats IGN, gamespot or fellow N-europers.
Emasher Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 I find GT and IGN, for Wii games anyway, tend to usually review to similar tastes to mine, so I usually find them the most reliable, but its really all down to someone's opinions. If you've found a review site you find reliable, thats good, but it doesn't mean its good for everyone.
Shino Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Reviews have turned pretty useless to me. Not that I ever bought a game based on a review but usually I read/watch them just to see were I disagree.
Ganepark32 Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Haven't read the Gamecentral review but their recent track record when it comes to Wii games is considerably off. 4 is way off for this. As others have said, this is a 7 or so I'd say, although I haven't done my review yet so I haven't sorted my score for this but I don't write from a reviewer's perspective. I'll look at it from a gamer's one and in relation to what else is on the market for the Wii.
mcj metroid Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 reviews are pretty useless.. I mean I used to think gamespot were ok for wii reviews but they gave wario ware smooth moves a 9.0... I mean fuck off a 9.0 for a game without proper multiplayer you can complete in an hour.. pshhaw ign then have the highly annoying matt cass who loves hyping average games because they are core.. eurogamer are probably my fav but go a bit nuts with the picross games giving them 10 everytime. edge annoy the shit out of me. scores wise and their snobby use of the english language..that sometimes nobody can understand official nintendo mag are too nice to all games i find. ngamer.. ha you know how I feel there.. out of all of them I have to go with gametrailers mainly because they SHOW you exactly what they are doing while they are reviewing.. their video player is much better than igns.. the score is very sidlined also..going through everything first and then showing it at the end.. Makes it better than written reviews where most people just look at the score and shit on the review. Haven't read the Gamecentral review but their recent track record when it comes to Wii games is considerably off. 4 is way off for this. As others have said, this is a 7 or so I'd say, although I haven't done my review yet so I haven't sorted my score for this but I don't write from a reviewer's perspective. I'll look at it from a gamer's one and in relation to what else is on the market for the Wii. without playing it I have to say it sounds like a 7: a 4 to most people means it's shit... which it clearly isn't.. A lot of effort went into this and it shows.. but if you were to take 4 literally it means below average... now that's a load of shit too.. look at the average wii game... I don't think it's unfair to say this is in the top 20 wii games to date..
Dog-amoto Posted July 14, 2009 Posted July 14, 2009 Urgh! This game is absolutely abysmal. It's one of the dullest, most bland shooters I've ever played. If this game were on the Xbox or PS3, it would have been laughed out of the building. I've stopped playing the campaign about half way in through sheer boredom and repetitiveness. The online fails to save it as well as I can have much more fun playing on Halo 3 I'm so disappointed too, as I was really looking forward to a decent shooter on the Wii. At least I should get a decent trade in value when I get Little King's Story. Here's hoping that Red Steel 2 will deliver.
Recommended Posts