It's really not that black and white, to be honest. Brand awareness is a huge thing as well as legacy names come into it. Something being a best seller doesn't automatically make it the best product. That's why sales numbers are meaningless to the consumer. The fact that I feel that way does exactly that. A Pinnacle game in terms of quality, not sales, should be very hard to make people go "hmm maybe I should hold off." It selling more in no way means that people think it's better. It has it's roots, and it's competitors have been chopping then little by little. I've seen this example thrown around and it fits; Toyota will sell more vehicles than Ferrari, doors that mean everyone would prefer the Corolla over there Ferrari? Sales are meaningless to us. It didn't get you a bigger game, it don't get you more content, and it didn't get the game to us any faster. So with the relatively small amounts of PS4's available at the time, you think it would have sold more? They put it on the console in which they had a relatively huge player base. I'm not seeing it that way. There was no one doing what GT was doing, on the scale it was doing. Either way you talk about it being the top because no one could come close to it's sales, yet try to say these games were "competition." That seems a bit contradictory to your point.