View Single Post
Old 08-28-2009, 03:42 PM   #39
MeanMrMustard
Rookie
 
OVR: 12
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Jackson, MS
I guess I just don't see how a sample of 4 reviews per sport, given a bunch of unknown variables, necessarily disproves the basic premise "competition makes things better." (One such unknown variable is how brand name recognition affects sales, which may affect how much "better" a game would have to be to keep up with the competition.)

I don't fault the author for the lack of sample size - a necessary evil, given the content - I just don't think it tells us a whole lot. Maybe it takes a few years for game "quality" (as measured by reviews) to catch up to sales in sports. It's the sales, after all, that the companies care about with reference to competition.

Anyway, an interesting take, and it certainly sparked some good discussion. I just have a hard time swallowing the premise: "The information below is going to show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the theory that competition creates better games for the consumer is pure baloney."

That's a bit presumptuous, wouldn't you say?
MeanMrMustard is offline  
Reply With Quote