Quantcast
View Post
ironmanDX said:
eva01beserk said:

Are you saying they might launch later just to make sure they have best specs and not increase any cost?

---> No. I'm saying why would they bother with the extra year of R&D costs plus potential loss of sales only to make the same mistake next generation? It makes absolutely no sense.  Xbox has been here for 3 generations now. Each one they've had the superior console. At best, the ps3 and 360 were a tie. Ps3 was theoretically more powerful but 3rd party games ran worse most of the generation. One X and og xbox are quite above their respective PlayStation comrades.  Xbox having the weaker hardware is the exception, not the rule.

Yes Xbox original were stronger than PS2, as it launched several years later.

PS3 is stronger than X360 no question, show by single party titles and by late gen multiplatforms.

PS4 is stronger than X1. X1X came much later and didn't affect the landscape at all. So if you want to have math PS4 stayed stronger than X1 for much longer than X1X is stronger than PS4Pro (and that also costed a year more to launch, higher price tag and lower sales).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994