I'm not so sure how correct the numbers are, but the Lost Planet series is I think sitting underneath 10 million sold total.
I'm pretty surprised, particularly in relation to the first Lost Planet. I thought that game was a huge success, but perhaps not?

Regardless; what, exactly, alienated consumers with LP1? I remember there being large comments on the stiffness of the 1-player, but it was never something that I, myself, noticed, and nothing that anyone who played LP1 with me noticed neither. Either way; very small complaint, so I'm sure I'm missing something.

LP2 is interesting. It has it's niche group of those who really love it, and then a (slightly) larger group who recognize it as an excellent co-op experience. I'm sure there is some percentage of gamers who enjoyed the 1P also---
But LP2 I understand in its failure. It was not a game designed to be played in 1P, and for it became a Connection-Required type-of game, which was just not an attractive title at the time. Furthermore the co-op focus and elevated punishment is extremely frustrating for running a smaller game of 2, and the game absolutely needed all sorts of player-handled management before taking on games and what-not.
Furthermore, and this gets neglected more than it should--- LP2 took away the snow, and a big part of what made LP1 so unique and beloved was the environment, and how realistically your character moved and struggled with it. The winter condition was, and still is, my favorite part of LP, and I'm sure this is shared by many.

But LP3--- I just don't get it. Let's recap this:
1) Less than 10 Million sold, so we know that the actual amount of players who've experience LP is small, and therefore have only internet/word-of-mouth opinions regarding the games as co-op oriented, or rigid.
2) LP1 was a good single-player game but that had better multiplayer.
3) LP2 was a poor single-player game but an excellent multiplayer.

So here is LP3, a downright excellent single-player game that has okay multiplayer--- but not only that, it also has a grounded, matured sci-fi tale, modern usage of TPS controls, and the restoration of believable winter conditions.

So my question to you all, is:
Why did LP3 fail for those who haven't played a Lost Planet before? What I'm wondering is why LP3, which finally waved its hand and said, 'Fine! We'll give them (the consumers who haven't bit) what they want!'still failed to reach the wider audience.

-Is sci-fi a dying interest in videogames? Certainly news to me (and not good news!)
-Can being associated with Lost Planet have something to do with it? Even though many more people than not haven't even played a Lost Planet?
-Folks who've been with the series were jaded by the lack of co-op, but the co-op never brought in the audience needed. Do you really believe that if Lp3 continued the co-op gameplay it would have brought in more of an audience while not alienating its already established one?


Personally, LP3 is my favorite. I am not a 'purist' at all with games, and so with LP3 I see 1) A very streamlined, fluent gameplay system; 2) Enjoyable writing that grips and progresses with excellent pacing; and 3) While the co-op dimissal is a big step, I can't say it's something I mind particularly because I only had limited fun with it. I did think it was special--- but it never brought me back once the feeling wore off. I think the passive sentiment regarding the co-op is more shared than voiced, but regardless; I am not jaded by the new direction of LP3, and welcomed it.