Support NeoGAF

[spwolf]

You can count precisely as many of the latest weeks as you want. Look at the weighted ranking, during the last few weeks no one has been dominating.

yes, infamous weighted ranking chart :lol

Do we have any newer actual numbers from Chart Track, you know the actual stats and not fantasies?

Last numbers I saw was from March 2008, while Wii was dominating... any newer ones?

 

[Psychotext]

Different people... same recycled arguments.

 

[test_account]

Different people... same recycled arguments.

Which arguments?

 

[Psychotext]

It's all along the same lines... domination / school holidays / sonyland / nintendoland / weighted ranking / number of titles etc.

Every.single.week.

 

[Souldriver]

It's all along the same lines... domination / school holidays / sonyland / nintendoland / weighted ranking / number of titles etc.

Every.single.week.

Just look at the charts and leave the thread. That's what I do. Let the Homer Simpson avatars fight it out under themselves. It's clear (after weeks and weeks of the same shit fight) that there are no mods monitoring these threads anyway, so I don't expect it to get better any time soon.

 

[Psychotext]

Once upon a time you could have some fairly decent euro based discussions here though. I know I can't change anything... but I still feel like complaining. :lol

 

[test_account]

It's all along the same lines... domination / school holidays / sonyland / nintendoland / weighted ranking / number of titles etc.

Every.single.week.

Ah ok, like that. I'm not sure if you were refering to me, but just to point out, my main point in what i wrote earlier was to show that the word "domination" does fit the dictionary description even if we are talking about just 1 week of sales. I havnt put out an argument to say that Sony and Microsoft are dominating, i just wanted to say that it is possible to use the word "domination" by looking at the dictionary description of the word, even if it is just about 1 week of sales. It depends in what context the domination is happening. In this context the domination is happening on a particular weekly UK Top 40 chart. That is basicly all i wanted to say earlier

 

[spwolf]

Ah ok, like that. I'm not sure if you were refering to me, but just to point out, my main point in what i wrote earlier was to show that the word "domination" does fit the dictionary description even if we are talking about just 1 week of sales. I havnt put out an argument to say that Sony and Microsoft are dominating, i just wanted to say that it is possible to use the word "domination" by looking at the dictionary description of the word, even if it is just about 1 week of sales. It depends in what context the domination is happening. In this context the domination is happening on a particular weekly UK Top 40 chart. That is basicly all i wanted to say earlier

you were loud and clear... problem is that some people still dont like the message.

My original ironical tease was indeed due to tens of "domination" posts during July and August, and of course, it was ok then... it fit the dictionary term of domination clearly

My purpose was exactly to point out how silly they were then, as they are now... you got it, they didnt, and they never will . I expect it to happen next week again... Just the way it works...

and Burns character nagging on Homer characters, thats just crazy.

 

[dyls]

I'm surprised I never heard about the big Sony-Microsoft merger that must have happened. I mean, why else would you guys continue to lump them together as if they had joined forces to defeat the evil Nintendo empire?

 

[Weisheit]

Ah ok, like that. I'm not sure if you were refering to me, but just to point out, my main point in what i wrote earlier was to show that the word "domination" does fit the dictionary description even if we are talking about just 1 week of sales. I havnt put out an argument to say that Sony and Microsoft are dominating, i just wanted to say that it is possible to use the word "domination" by looking at the dictionary description of the word, even if it is just about 1 week of sales. It depends in what context the domination is happening. In this context the domination is happening on a particular weekly UK Top 40 chart. That is basicly all i wanted to say earlier

Thats the thing, the guy you're defending isn't talking about 1 weeks sales. He keeping saying, I think, that it's been like this for weeks. Maybe I'm going insane but the Wii had more games chart just last week (same as the 360, more than the PS3), no. 16 the week before that (360 had 8 PS3 7), 17 the week before that (360 7 PS3 7). How the hell does that add up to domination?


Edit:^^Is that what I'm missing, is he counting X360, PS3 together? Figures.

 

[test_account]

you were loud and clear... problem is that some people still dont like the message.

My original ironical tease was indeed due to tens of "domination" posts during July and August, and of course, it was ok then... it fit the dictionary term of domination clearly

My purpose was exactly to point out how silly they were then, as they are now... you got it, they didnt, and they never will . I expect it to happen next week again... Just the way it works...

and Burns character nagging on Homer characters, thats just crazy.

Ye, i actually thought you were teasing with that "domination" comment hehe, but as said, 1 week of sale can still find under the dictionary description of the word "domination", tease or no tease

I'm surprised I never heard about the big Sony-Microsoft merger that must have happened. I mean, why else would you guys continue to lump them together as if they had joined forces to defeat the evil Nintendo empire?

I have seen some people refering to them (the PS3 and the Xbox 360) as the HD Twins. If i remember correctly i have also seen some comments that says something about that Wii is outselling both the "next-gen" consoles. The PS3 and the Xbox 360 are pretty simular when it comes to the graphical stuff etc. in the games, which results in that we are seeing relatively many PS3 and Xbox 360 (and PC) multiplatform titles, while Wii is abit different. I guess this is some of the reasons why some people sometimes are couting both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 together against the Wii, but i'm not 100% sure. But all 3 systems are competing against eachother, there is no doubt about that

Thats the thing, the guy you're defending isn't talking about 1 weeks sales. He keeping saying, I think, that it's been like this for weeks. Maybe I'm going insane but the Wii had more games chart just last week (same as the 360, more than the PS3), no. 16 the week before that (360 had 8 PS3 7), 17 the week before that (360 7 PS3 7). How the hell does that add up to domination?


Edit:^^Is that what I'm missing, is he counting X360, PS3 together? Figures.

I havnt followed the charts that closely when it comes to X numbers of titles that have charted for each system, so it might just have been for this week ye, but i just wanted to point out that if anyone (i was thinking about people in general, not just about Spwolf) should want to use the word "domination" when they are talking about this week's UK Top 40 chart, then it is possible going by the dictionary description of the word "domination"


EDIT: I just checked some of the recently previous weeks, and i cant see any Xbox 360 or PS3 software domination in the UK Top 40 charts, so i guess Spwolf was only talking about this week's chart where the PS3 has twice as many titles compared to the Wii (10 games VS 5 games), and the Xbox 360 also has twice as many + 1 compared to the Wii (11 games VS 5 games).


EDIT 2: Or maybe Spwolf was also refering to other european charts than the UK top 40.

 

[Jokeropia]

It depends on if you mean the market looking at the bigger picture or how the market is on a weekly basis. I cant see that anyone has claimed that Xbox 360 and/or PS3 is ruling the market now though since i'm fairly sure that most people would think of the bigger picture when they hear and say "rule the market".

Can you really "rule" a week? (I.e not rule [the market] for a week, but rule the actual week itself?) Seems like odd use of language.

The principle is the same even if you split it into 1/10 or 1/1.000.000. The definition of the word "domination" is not tied up to a specific time period and/or a specific percentage etc.

I disagree. When you get down into extremely small parts of something (<1%) the word "domination" loses it's meaning and will only sound like sarcasm. It's like losing a football match 1-10 and claiming to have "dominated" during the three minutes in the second half you scored your one goal.

Note that all of the dictionary definitions refer to the whole of something.

I am just speculating and thinking loud if they could have been talking about the particular week as well when they said "Nintendo domination"

Let's assume for a second that they were. It's still not the same thing since when those comments were the most prevalent, Nintendo scored ~70 on the weighted ranking compared to ~10 for 360 and PS3. Even if you use just the last few weeks, by that standard there's no domination whatsoever going on now.

That was my initial point in the first place. Explaining the difference between claiming domination back then and doing it now.

I just checked some of the recently previous weeks, and i cant see any Xbox 360 or PS3 software domination in the UK Top 40 charts, so i guess Spwolf was only talking about this week's chart

That's what I thought at first, but then he replied with this:

you keep mentioning one week for past few weeks :lol .

How long will it be one week?

yes, infamous weighted ranking chart :lol

Haha, so now you're gonna switch focus to that? Do you have something better to use?

Do we have any newer actual numbers from Chart Track, you know the actual stats and not fantasies?

The irony is palpable.

Last numbers I saw was from March 2008, while Wii was dominating... any newer ones?

I have numbers for all of Europe through September.

 

[Threi]

 

[Jokeropia]

.

 

[test_account]

Can you really "rule" a week? (I.e not rule [the market] for a week, but rule the actual week itself?) Seems like odd use of language.

Wouldnt "rule the market for a week" and "rule the actual week" be the same, atleast when we are talking about sales? It might sound like an odd use of language, but going stricktly by the dictionary definition of "to rule", then it is not tied upto a specific time duration, just like it is with "to dominate".

I disagree. When you get down into extremely small parts of something (<1%) the word "domination" loses it's meaning and will only sound like sarcasm. It's like losing a football match 1-10 and claiming to have "dominated" during the three minutes in the second half you scored your one goal.

Note that all of the dictionary definitions refer to the whole of something.

I see your point, but i can explain alittle more what i ment.

Exactly, the whole of something, but it depends on how you define what is "the whole of something". For example, if you have 1 apple, then this apple is 100% ("the whole of something"). If you cut this apple into 4 pieces then you will have 4 pieces where each piece are 25%. But if you take 1 of these apple pieces and place it on "its own", then this apple piece is also 100%. So in this case, the whole apple can be "the whole of something" and 1 piece of the apple can also be defined as the "whole of something". It depends on how you look at it and how you split things up (or what i shall say)

It is the same with the soccer example. It is possible by the dictionary definition to say that you dominated for 3 minutes, since you can split the soccer match into several of parts, and you can define each one of these parts as "the whole of something". If a team loses a match 1-10 and if someone says that the losing team was dominating, and without saying anything else, then most people will most likely think that they are refering to the whole match itself (the bigger picture), and not just the small period of 3 minutes. By looking at the whole match ("the whole of something"), the losing team was not dominating and it might sound like sarcasm indeed if you are refering to the whole match itself and not just those 3 mintues.

This is what i have been trying to say, it depends on how you define what "the whole of something" is. If you take one week by its own, then this week is 100%. If you take 1 week out a 100 weeks, then this week is just 1%, but both weeks can be "the whole of something" depending on how you look at it

Let's assume for a second that they were. It's still not the same thing since when those comments were the most prevalent, Nintendo scored ~70 on the weighted ranking compared to ~10 for 360 and PS3. Even if you use just the last few weeks, by that standard there's no domination whatsoever going on now.

Yep, that is correct, because here you are refering to several of weeks as "the whole of something". Lookin at these several of weeks as a whole there is no particular domination indeed. Also, you can say Nintendo dominated more when they have 17 Wii titles in the UK Top 40 compared to how the PS3 has 10 titles now and the Xbox 360 has 11 titles, so in this case, Nintendo was dominating more than what the PS3 and the Xbox 360 are doing now.

That was my initial point in the first place. Explaining the difference between claiming domination back then and doing it now.

Ye, i think i understand what you mean. You are thinking of several of weeks (or maybe months) of charts as "the whole of something", correct? In this case there is indeed no domination by the PS3 and/or the Xbox 360. But if Spwolf (or anyone else for that matter) was only thinking about week 45 as "the whole of something", then it is possible to use the word "domination" by the dictionary definition Spwolf said he was teasing with that "domination" comment though.

That's what I thought at first, but then he replied with this:

Ok, i havnt really followed Spwolf's post that closely to be honest, but if he (or anyone else) would like to say that the PS3 and/or the Xbox 360 dominated in the UK Top 40 chart in week 45, then it is possible by the dictionary definition of the word "domination". That was actually all i wanted to say

Haha, so now you're gonna switch focus to that? Do you have something better to use?

Was this comment directed to me? If so, i'm not trying to switch focus at all. All i did was to answer to Weisheit. I am actually not disagreeing with you or anything, because what you say is true, looking at the bigger picture as "the whole of something", then Nintendo is definitely dominating (especially with the hardware sales), i agree clearly to that The only point that i wanted to get out is that it is possibly to use the word "domination" to small parts and not by looking at the bigger picture, because small parts can also be defined as "the whole of something" if you know what i mean

EDIT: After reading it again, i guess that this comment was directed to Spwolf?

 

[Jokeropia]

Wouldnt "rule the market for a week" and "rule the actual week" be the same, atleast when we are talking about sales? It might sound like an odd use of language, but going stricktly by the dictionary definition of "to rule", then it is not tied upto a specific time duration, just like it is with "to dominate".

Regardless of how you'd want to define it, I maintain that you don't rule the market based on one week of sales. (Which I also said earlier and you seemed to agree with in your last post.) So if you define the two expressions as being the same, I don't think either is apt.

Exactly, the whole of something, but it depends on how you define what is "the whole of something".

Indeed, but I'd say that it's generally not hard to ascertain whether something is just a small part of something else or a significant 'whole' by itself. (It's also possible to be both.) All of the examples mentioned in the definition ("the world", "his life", "the town"*, "the forest", "the market") are of the latter category. (Some could fit in both, but they most certainly have significance by themselves.)

(* This one is from a definition that doesn't really apply in this case, though.)

It is the same with the soccer example. It is possible by the dictionary definition to say that you dominated for 3 minutes, since you can split the soccer match into several of parts, and you can define each of these parts as "the whole of something". If a team loses a match 1-10 and you say that the losing team was dominating, and without saying anything else, then most people will most likely think that you are refering to the whole match itself (the bigger picture), and not just the small period of 3 minutes. By looking at the whole match (the bigger picture), the losing team was not dominating and it might sound like sarcasm indeed if you are refering to the whole match itself and not just those 3 mintues.

It can sound like sarcasm even if you just refer to the three minutes. Say we're in the second half and the score is 0-6. Now is when you score your goal and cry out "domination!"

Don't you at least agree that it sounds silly?

This is what i have been trying to say, it depends on how you define what "the whole of something" is. If you take one week by its own, then this week is 100%. If you take 1 week out a 100 weeks, then this week is just 1%, but both weeks can be "the whole of something" depending on how you look at it

By my definition above, I really don't consider one week of sales to have any significance on it's own.

Ye, i think i understand what you mean. You are thinking of several of weeks (or maybe months) of charts as "the whole of something", correct? In this case there is indeed no domination by the PS3 and/or the Xbox 360. But if Spwolf (or anyone else for that matter) was only thinking about week 45 as "the whole of something", then it is possible to use the word "domination" by the dictionary definition Spwolf said he was teasing with that "domination" comment though.

Not in that particular statement, no. I was just explaining there that even if we use just the last week as a whole (as silly and improper as I think it is), it's still not the same domination as Nintendo had back then. (~70 vs. ~10.)

EDIT: After reading it again, i guess that this comment was directed to Spwolf?

Right you are.

 

[830920]

Swedish multi-platform chart week 45, 2008

01. Gears of War 2 (360)
02. Little Big Planet (PS3)
03. Command & Conquer Red Alert 3 (PC)
04. Fallout 3 (PC)
05. Fallout 3 (360)
06. Fable 2 (360)
07. Fallout 3 (PS3)
08. Wii Fit (Wii)
09. Lego Batman (PS2)
10. Far Cry 2 (PC)
11. Guitar Hero 3: Legends of Rock (PS2)
12. FIFA 09 (360)
13. FIFA 09 (PS3)
14. Mario Kart Wii
15. FIFA 09 (PS2)
16. The Sims 2 Livet i lägenhet (PC)
17. World of Warcraft (PC)
18. World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (PC)
19. World of Warcraft Battlechest (PC)
20. Motorstorm Pacific Rift (PS3)

 

[test_account]

Regardless of how you'd want to define it, I maintain that you don't rule the market based on one week of sales. (Which I also said earlier and you seemed to agree with in your last post.) So if you define the two expressions as being the same, I don't think either is apt.

I see your point, and i do indeed agree to that you dont rule the market based on one week when you look at the whole lifetime (about 5-7 years or so?) on this generations of consoles as "the whole of something", but my only point was to show that it is possible to use the word "domination" by definition, because the definition of the word "domination" can be very vague. There is no black and white or any key answer to how big or how long things must be before you are able to use the word "domination". If you write i.e an essay in school and you write that something dominated for a week, then you wont get corrected on it like it would be a grammar error or something. Going by this, then i think it is ok to use the word "domination" even if it just about one week of sales as well. That was my only point

Right now it feels abit like that i am nitpicking (or what i shall say) in the discussion, because that i am pretty sure that i know what you mean and Spwolf has already said that he was teasing with the comment, so i am sorry about the nitpicking. I just wanted to make sure that i explained my point as clearly as possible so there was no missunderstanding in what i ment English isnt my first language either.

Indeed, but I'd say that it's generally not hard to ascertain whether something is just a small part of something else or a significant 'whole' by itself. (It's also possible to be both.) All of the examples mentioned in the definition ("the world", "his life", "the town"*, "the forest", "the market") are of the latter category. (Some could fit in both, but they most certainly have significance by themselves.)

Ye, that might be, but i was strickly going after the pure definition of the word itself

(* This one is from a definition that doesn't really apply in this case, though.)
It can sound like sarcasm even if you just refer to the three minutes. Say we're in the second half and the score is 0-6. Now is when you score your goal and cry out "domination!"

Don't you at least agree that it sounds silly?

Sure, i agree to that it sounds silly if you cry out "domination!" like that, but if a sports commentator says something like "Team A had a really though 1st period with letting in 6 goals, but in the 3 minutes of the 2nd half Team A was really dominating over Team B as they had 7 great goal chances while Team B had none", then i would not understand this as sarcasm.

By my definition above, I really don't consider one week of sales to have any significance on it's own.

Ye, that is true, neither do i

Not in that particular statement, no. I was just explaining there that even if we use just the last week as a whole (as silly and improper as I think it is), it's still not the same domination as Nintendo had back then. (~70 vs. ~10.)

Ah ok, then i understand what you mean. Ye, i agree to that, as i wrote in my post previous post here, you can say that the Wii had a bigger domination because the Wii had 17 titles in the UK Top 40, while the PS3 and the Xbox 360 "only" had 10 and 11 titles each.

Right you are.

Ah ok, i just had to ask since you had 2 quotes by Spwolf under my quote, so i wasnt sure if both of those quotes was directed to me, or if it was only the first quote. But after reading it again, i thought that only the first quote was directed to me, but i had to ask to be sure, i am sorry for the missunderstanding

 

[spwolf]

I have numbers for all of Europe through September.

software numbers? where? or are we now talking about hardware?

 

[szaromir]

Australia :
Week 45, 2008

01 (__) [360] Gears of War 2 (Microsoft)
02 (__) [PS2] SmackDawn vs Raw 2009 (THQ)
03 (06) [WII] Wii Play (Nintendo)
04 (07) [WII] Mario Kart Wii (Nintendo)
05 (08) [NDS] Sight Training (Nintendo)
06 (03) [WII] Wii Fit (Nintendo)
07 (01) [360] Fallout 3 (Bethesda)
08 (__) [PS3] Little Big Planet (Sony)
09 (__) [NDS] Brain Training (Nintendo)
10 (04) [PS3] Fallout 3 (Bethesda)


Wow, 5 Nintendo titles in Top 10 even during this period. They're unstoppable. GOW2 as expected, Fable 2 sadly out of Top 10 (it's #3 on 360 chart, though, so still doing well). interesting to see PS2 having a game so high at this point. New Zealand charts haven't been posted yet.

 

[Psychotext]

LBP.

 

[BishopLamont]

Guys, I made a new thread.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=342055

 

[Jokeropia]

Right now it feels abit like that i am nitpicking (or what i shall say) in the discussion, because that i am pretty sure that i know what you mean and Spwolf has already said that he was teasing with the comment, so i am sorry about the nitpicking. I just wanted to make sure that i explained my point as clearly as possible so there was no missunderstanding in what i ment English isnt my first language either.

Yeah the discussion has about run it's course. I'll just make some short points.

If you write i.e an essay in school and you write that something dominated for a week, then you wont get corrected on it like it would be a grammar error or something.

I think it could be considered improper/silly usage. Depending on how picky the teacher is you could perhaps get a small note rather than an actual deduction, though.

Sure, i agree to that it sounds silly if you cry out "domination!" like that, but if a sports commentator says something like "Team A had a really though 1st period with letting in 6 goals, but in the 3 minutes of the 2nd half Team A was really dominating over Team B as they had 7 great goal chances while Team B had none", then i would not understand this as sarcasm.

Right, but I didn't really envision any other huge goal chances apart from the actual goal.

software numbers? where?

 

[test_account]

I think it could be considered improper/silly usage. Depending on how picky the teacher is you could perhaps get a small note rather than an actual deduction, though.

Ye, i agree, i think it is possible that a teacher might comment on the usage of the word "domination" if the word is used in a context about something that happend during a 1 week period, since the description of the word "domination" can be vague, so people might look at it differently on what domination is and on what domination isnt.

I'm no teacher myself, so i dont know how they think (i guess it can variate from teacher to teacher), if they are learned up to strickly follow the dictionary definition of the words when they grade i.e essays, even if the words might be understood in several of different ways, or if they go by what they mean is the most proper use of the words. I would say that it would be possible to argue/discuss with the teacher if he/she should make any comments on your paper beucase you used the word "domination" about something that only lasted for about a week though, atleast in my opinion

Right, but I didn't really envision any other huge goal chances apart from the actual goal.

Ah ok, i understand what you mean

Yeah the discussion has about run it's course. I'll just make some short points.

Ye, i think we have atleast both stated our points and got to say what we mean now in this discussion, and i think that is good Thanks for the discussion!

 

[Jokeropia]

^
Likewise.

I would say that it would be possible to argue/discuss with the teacher if he/she should make any comments on your paper beucase you used the word "domination" about something that only lasted for about a week though, atleast in my opinion

Surely, what I was thinking of was a comment like "is domination really the most appropriate word you can use there?" as opposed to "this is wrong, minus one point". (Or whatever.)

 

[test_account]

^
Likewise.

^Surely, what I was thinking of was a comment like "is domination really the most appropriate word you can use there?" as opposed to "this is wrong, minus one point". (Or whatever.)

Ah ok, like that. Ye, that is true, if a teacher did it like that i would have think it would have been no problem

 

[Dabookerman]

edit: Woops, wrong thread.