View Post
Hiku said:
Rankstrail said:
Hiku said:
Rankstrail said:

How can the 3DS beat it while Nintendo has already launched their new portable console? (New 3DS)

(new format of games for a new console that is backwards compatibile, like my 60GB PS3, that didn't count in PS2 sales, right?)

New 3DS is still a 3DS. The number of new exclusive games announced for it so far is just 1, and that number probably won't grow beyond even 1% of the consoles library during its lifetime. The PS3 counting for PS2 sales analogy would be more accurately compared to 3DS's ability to play DS games.

I see your point but still disagree greatly, they are not pushing the NEW format of games, ok, but still there is a new format of games (only one for now) that is for a CONSOLE that is not a 3DS (how do you call that?) They plan on selling for backwards compatibility, ok. the analogy you make with 3DS playing DS games is completely different in numbers from mine, ONLY THE very FIRST model of PS3 played PS2 games, that is a single model (of a total of maybe 20?) that can be counted as a PS2 because there is phisically both PS2 CPU and GPU inside (exactly the same chips).

If a new console doesn't exist then no one needs to buy a new one to play Xenoblade remake right? (joking) The box of the game doesn't lie, it is for a NEW console. (I count 2DS as a 3DS if you are wondering if I am biased, I let the boxes decide if one is a new console or not) Sony for example when talking about ps1 titles in recent years always tells that they are "PS1-FORMAT" titles.

People don't count it as a new console because it doesn't have enough new games to be counted as one. Not even remotely close. And if 99,99% of its library is made up of 3DS games, I wouldn't call it backwards compatibility. Because that would be the main library of games that it was primarily designed for. An actual new console is primarily designed for it's new games. This console is not. PS3 had vastly different architecture than PS2, and so they had to go out of their way to ensure that it would be backwards compatible by implementing a secondary chip. That's not the case with new 3DS. It has exactly the same hardware architecture, only a bit more powerful in some areas. It's a 3DS that has the capability of playing some new games. Not a new 3DS that has backwards compatibility. What kind of new console's library is made up of 99% backwards compatible games?
For new 3DS to be counted as a new separate console, it would have needed to be significantly different or more powerful than its predecessor, and have a focus on new games.

Well the Wii had a very big focus on new games but was very very similar to a gamecube right?

"What kind of new console's library is made up of 99% backwards compatible games?" it's ONLY Nintendo that does such a thing, one game is enough, that one single game is for a new console released by Nintendo after the 3DS, that single game is proof a new console has launched, they handle things very differently from other companies, number of games doesn't matter, it's just the company's plans that decided not to leave out too much old 3DS owners.

PS3 launched in EU torritory with only 6 games if I remember correctly (not that it matters very much)

No need to create again and again double standards to accomodate Nintendo's choiches, their choiches may be good or bad but I call a new console when I see one, ONE GAME IS ENOUGH.

Well there isn't ANY game only for "PS TV" for example, so is that a new console for you? (hardware on the motherboard is the exact same as the PS Vita, plus added very few components, in fact it can't use the usb for storage, pendrive, hdds....)

Other companies focus on new games, Nintendo doesn't always do that, like it did with DSi, that had its own firmware and softwares.

Persona 5 on PS3, I won't need next gen!