They should crawl back to Sony and get bought. Better then closing down because they release some mediocre games (Aside from Ratchet & Clank)

Capcom is publishing Remember Me

Keep in mind that Dead Island: Riptide is No. 3, so accounting for quality and taste is not as straightforward as applying that to Fuse. Personally I think this is another example of a big publisher investing a lot into a project and seeing it out the door as quickly as possible to die with little marketing push or enthusiasm from their end. This is a game where only the best buzz from reviews would have made a difference but without it and a proper ad campaign, it sort of just limply falls onto the charts.

Then again, games that for all intents and purposes deserve better can sell abysmally. Shadows of the Damned did sell about 50,000+ copies didn't it?

No, he's right, but he's still wrong. I looked it up myself. Couple can mean:

1) Two items of the same kind

2) And indefinite small number

I say he's right, but he still is wrong, because anyone who uses couple and doesn't mean two should be slapped in the face.

There's nothing pedantic about explaining that. It is known to everyone in this thread, including myself, as my post was intended to be humorous. That's why I said something stupid, then said math doesn't lie, and then said "seriously though."

Pedantic refers to a focus on detail, but more specifically it refers to a focus on details that aren't understood by many people. It's a lot like "esoteric" in that sense.

@razielcuts said:

Regardless of the country of origin, every dictionary you can find will tell you the same thing. A "couple" can mean exactly 2, or a small number of the same thing. Here's Cambridge's definition. Also because he was guessing about a number, it makes more sense that he was using the latter definition.

That'll teach those jerks for making a competent third-person action shooter.

It is a bit hard to believe that a newly released game sells only 200 copies in UK.

Besides the guy seems to be speculating.

Maybe he meant 200k.

Whether it be 200 or 200k copies, entering at 37 of the chart at this time of year is pretty grim no matter how you try to spin it. I feared that this was a game had sent out to die silently, as they have done very little promotion for it and it appears that may well be the case.

i could not stop reading the quoted part as if it was some pop chart on a bad radio station

well to be fair tomb raider was placed nr 10 with x amount of copies sold in that specific week, but that was also released about 3 months ago. now fuse is brand spanking new and usually its should sell the best in the first couple of week and then maybe trickle down slowly.
so if its selling this bad, it cant be a good sign for the rest of its normal shelf life.
is what i saying making any sense, hopefully you can see the point im trying to make

no way, no waaaay, 200 is fuckin crazy low

Competent doesn't cut it. Especially when compared to Insomniac's past work with the Ratchet series.

Now I'm a little worried for Last of Us and Remember Me.... Fuse wasn't that bad, and I can see selling a good amount of copies easily within the first week when I worked at a game store.

I rarely buy full price games. About onme every six months. Otherwise I buy games on sale. I am not surprised games are not selling well since there are so many games already for current systems and what is the point of another generic shooter, especially since graphics and game design have barely improved over the last 5 years on consoles. At least when it comes to shooters. One of the few genres that actually have seen innovation in the last few years is RPG's, especially western RPG's. But not everyone is happy with how Fallout, Dragon Age or Mass Effect have changed to become more action oriented.

@awesomeusername:

I know, just mentioned it since it's a new IP releasing in close proximity to Fuse.

200,000 for the UK alone would be very good sales figures for the first week and would certainly place it higher than 37th in the charts.

He could have meant 2000, but even that would be abysmal. That said, it really doesn't surprise me. After they sucked all the personality out of the game, it was pretty obvious that it was going to bomb hard.

I didn't see a single advert for this in the UK, NONE WHATSOEVER.

They deserved it, for the product they put out. Hopefully this is the time people realize "Wait...all of these military shooters are the exact same thing" and Call of Duty's throne will come crashing down.

I'm always baffled by people who literally interpret a "couple" as "two".

Yes, you're entirely right.

No, very few people literally mean "two" when they say "a couple".

And when I said "Few" right there, I didn't mean three.

Pretty much this. I think I saw an advert on Gamespot perhaps (or maybe Eurogamer, I can not remember now) and that is about all I have seen. I did not even know what this game was until I heard talk of it this site. It seems to be a game that has been rushed out without any media buy in within the UK so this probably explains the really low numbers. Is this game any good?

I never thought Insomniac did much of worth outside of Ratchet, which they very quickly drove into the fucking ground. It doesn't surprise me that they make another average shooter that doesn't benefit from the "exclusive shooter" bump and tank.

RIght.

More to the point, there are two types of words when describing numbers of things. Numbers used specifically when you know the amount, such as "The doctor says take two", and words used when one does not know the specific amount. "Here, take a couple of these".

"Where is the highway? I dunno. Drive that way a couple of blocks and you should reach it".

"I'm fat? Well, I mean, I might have gained a few pounds, but I'm still wearing the same size pants as I did in high school!"

To take the words literally is essentially to abandon the idea that people can speak on a subject without absolute certainty.

Moreover, isn't the margin of error on estimating game sales higher than 200 copies? If someone was reporting that the publisher sold EXACTLY 200 copies, why not just publish the names and addresses of the people as well?

I guess that someone's playing the "smart guy" card wrong here, and it surely ain't me. "A couple of" can be used with either definition in mind in English. You can be as adamant as you want about if "a few" is an acceptable interpretation of the expression or not, but the fact is that it is widely used in that way, whether you like it or not. Also, please notice that I never advocated the use of both or either interpretations as "correct", but rather pointed out that, again, both can and are commonly used, and that in this case, both could fit the bill.

I provided you with three different examples in which the phrase "a couple of" is proved to have both definitions (plus the other link to another dictionary posted afterwards). If you have any proof that it, in fact, is not used as "a few" (not that it shouldn't be used that way, though), please, I would love to educate myself on the matter. Otherwise, you can stop calling names, because you're not as smart as you think, duder.

Edit: Also, your definition of "handful" is, again, too strict. Yes, it can mean "five", as in "five fingers", but it can also mean "a few". Gasp! Because, you know, you can have "a handful of grapes" and "a handful of lentils", and they are not necessary five of each. Unless, of course, your hands work in a very peculiar way.

I'm always baffled by people who don't use "couple" when they mean two, "few" when they mean three, and "several" when they mean four or more.

Perhaps it's a regional thing.

I really don't get this attitude at all. So you want to see EA fail and people lose jobs? You want to see one of the giants in the gaming industry fail? Do you have any idea what the industry-wide ramifications of that would be? If mighty EA fails, then what does that say for every other company out there? You may not like some business practices and hope they change, but to wish for a company to fail is pretty short-sighted. As someone who lost a job because of issues at the top of a company, it is kind of a sore point for anyone to wish that on anyone else.

First of all, let's get the whole 'losing jobs' part out of the equation. People lose jobs all the time in every field around the world, and they find jobs afterwards almost always if they're qualified. I've lost jobs, many people I know did, everyone around the world does, there's nothing tragic about it. Yes, it sucks, it means you suffer trying to pay the bills for a few months, but I'm not a fan of how us game fans always make it sound like people straight up died whenever there's a firing. So what if they get fired? They start sending out resumes, that's how the world works.

I'm sorry you lost that job, I lost mine three weeks ago. I've already had some interviews and hope to get back on the money train soon, and I hope the same to you.

Now about EA: It pleases me when EA pump out what according to my personal standards are "bad" games, and fail to make the cash they set out to make. A lot of people will disagree with me on how almost every game EA invests in nowadays, is a brilliant IP with potential that was half-assed and designed to make money, not to provide great experiences for the player. It is my personal opinion that that company is ruining the integrity and soul of this industry.

However a lot of people will agree with me that this game looked very promising at the start and now it's been EA'fied. That's the whole point: EA-fication failing = pleasure.

And when it comes to a giant failing, well that has always been interesting to see, good fresh things always come from big monopolizing dirty corporations crashing down. If EA goes belly up, that opens up a whole new level of opportunities for both competitors and people working under EA who wish they could have more artistic freedom in their products.

Even if I'm wrong since I'm not a business expert, I still think it's justified to enjoy seeing someone fail when they try to rip people off and lower the standards of game design.

I would have gave it a chance had it not been changed into such a generic snorefest. Damn you EA.

I hope Insomniac's next project (Safe to assume Fuse 2 isn't happening anymore) is more unique and interesting.

Frankly this is a positive thing.

I'm glad all of that focus testing payed off!

Fuse is the Poochie of video games.

Yeesh, debuting at 37 for the week is super harsh. It could have stood out with the original art style (and a bit more craziness to it) but it's just so bland now that this isn't that surprising really.

Holy fuck, how are half the posts in this thread about the meaning of "couple"?

Yeah Fuse has had no marketing whatsoever in the UK, you would only know about it over here if you're the kind of video game fan who reads American websites like this one. And guess what, all of those people know about the focus crap rubbish. Also, if you've never heard of it and walk into a branch of Game to see if anything new is out, the box doesn't really scream 'quality product'. It's still quite amazing to only come 37th in a week when gaming sales are about as low as you can ever expect (rare sunny weather into the bargain).

I do think the market for the big budget style of video game in general is getting smaller (at least at the £40-£45 release price), so many of these games are released to miserable sales.

Finally, Pachter said this would sell 5m copies. HA!

Thanks, focus groups!

Also, how in the hell do people not know that couple = 2? A few might not always mean 3, but a couple always means 2.

I felt the same way, but look at a dictionary. It's right there. That doesn't change the simple fact that all the dictionaries are wrong, though.

Not too surprising. The game did not receive a great deal of marketing, and the studio behind it didn't seem too happy with what it made. Somewhere along the line the publisher and the developer kind of knew it wouldn't be a big success, and so they just let it out quietly, hoping that it would at least recover a bit of the cost that went into developing it.