You hear it all the time from PS4 owners why buy an xbox as it only has shooters. But the userbase of PS4 are fine with shooters because they are the most popular games on consoles and most bought. The best game sold on PS4 uncharted is action./shooter game.

How so? Try re-reading what you wrote. You basically said TLG being hyped on a gaming forum doesn't == the rest of the world. I pointed out it wasn't just hyped in a gaming forum. There is no need for you to defend it's poor sales.

And you know how much mainstream appeal it had? You conduct a poll? As I said, there is no need for you to come in here defending it's poor sales nor make up excuses as to why.

I wasn't arguing anything other than it's had poor sales. Cows expected it sell well and Sony expected it sell well but it didn't. You're trying to make excuses and defend it's poor sales when the expectation was clearly to sell well. Why spend the massive amounts of time and money into a game that isn't expected to sell well? You think Sony is in it for the love of gaming?

My post used cows since cows were the ones that were hyping it in SWs but are now claiming it wasn't expected to sell well. Were they saying that for the past decade? Nope the exact opposite.

Going by your logic, any game that isn't "mainstream" won't sell well nor should it be expected too. I think BB sales kind of destroy your theory unless you think selling over 2M for a "niche" game is not good.

Battlefield 1, Cod, Fifa always on top on both consoles. Sony fanboys claim xbox one is only a shooter console, but the same people are on the PS4 buying shooters and ignoring games released by Sony.

Oh that's right it was ONLY the cows on SWs hyping it up right? No one is the "real" world new about the game, the game that was brought up at almost every E3 and hyped OUTSIDE of SWs. If you need help with that concept feel free to ask me...I'll do my best to explain it to you

You cows keep pushing that narrative. A game 10 years in dev and constantly brought up by cows as the next big game wasn't expected to sell well. Hahahaha yeah ok guess you cows don't like buying the 1st party games not called UC4

1. Scorpio APU's 362 mm^2 - Polaris 10's 232 mm^2 = 130 mm^2 chip area size available for the CPU side.

2. Scorpio APU's 362 mm^2 - half of Vega 10 with 262 mm^2 = 100 mm^2 chip area size available for the CPU side.

There's no large 32 MB ESRAM to waste the reminding chip area budget. Vega has Maxwell style micro-tile cache rendering approach with needs tiny extra cache.

232 mm^2already includes8 32 bit GDDR5 memory controllers.

With 100 to 130 mm^2 available for the CPU+NB+MCHs, the CPU solution is NOT Jaguar based.

Boost mode should be better on Xbox Scorpio.

Generally speaking, I think Splatoon scored quite well among critics. It seemed to be in the 8's and 7's region with a few 9's and 10's.

Your arguments against Arms is complete conjecture though. I think it's only based on your preference in games and the impression you got from viewing the game. You might put a wee bit too much solace in critical reception to decide how you should feel about a game.

This is what I got from quora when I googled AAA games

"In the video game industry, AAA (pronounced "triple A") or Triple-A is a classification term used for games with the highest development budgets and levels of promotion. A title considered to be AAA is therefore expected to be a high quality game or to be among the year's bestsellers."

Nothing to do with critical reception. And Wikipedia:

"An AAA game (usually pronounced "triple A game") is an informal classification used for video games with the highest development budgets and levels of promotion. AAA game development is associated with high economic risk, with high levels of sales required to obtain profitability."

We had this conversation before and I was of the opinion that there was a level of confusion regarding the definition of AAA games including critical reception, but generally speaking it has everything to do with the budget and the marketing.

What about games with very small budgets that receive high critical acclaim? Are they AAA too?

You're entitled to feel how you wish to feel and it's important to be honest with your impressions. If you see a game like Arms and feel that it's not for you, that's fine. It's less constructive to slot an unreleased game into a Good/Decent category, one which you haven't played and one which has been receiving positive feedback from hands-on impressions on the grounds that the game doesn't look like a high-budget action/adventure title. Games are allowed to be something different from the high budget blockbusters and still be considered a significant release. It's a matter of preference. I think Arms looks way more appealing than Horizon: Zero Dawn for instance. It's just my preference.

It does make a decent argument, and it goes to show that the developers of Doom did not focus on the multiplayer because that's not what the game is famous for.