- A 27 year old male gamer
- Joined on May 2nd 2012, last online 12 hours ago.
- Profile Views: 16,271
- Forum posts: 3,279 times which averages 2 posts per day
Badges: (view all)
Recent Wall PostsView more
Hi. You asked for a PS1 VS PS4 comparation right?
PS4 - 43.50 million
PS1 - 17.60 million
PS3 took some months to get EU, that puts it a bit down. However, PS2 actually had a big advantage against PS4, since it launched almost simultaneously worldwide, while PS4 remained some months without Japan.
The comparation i made has the firsts 7 months of PS2 in Japan only, while PS4 has the first 3 months NA+EU only, so PS4 was much advantage.
PS2 - 9.3 million
PS4 - 3.1 million
PS2 - 18.8 million
PS4 - 14.3 million
Don't have EU numbers sorry.
PS4 is at 17..4M in EU. So we have 42.9M aligned for PS2 and 34,8M for PS4. Which means that PS4 sold around 81% of PS2 numbers putting it on track for 130M if both consoles follow the same pace.
The important question is, do you really still see PS3 selling more than 100m? ;)
Anyway, I don' think it will take much time to discontinue it, unless they have another price cut coming to keep it going for 2 or 3 years.
Hello Torok, sorry for the disorder.
But can i ask a question? Do you still think that PS3 will sell 100,000,000 lifetime?
I'm not so sure. I think 90M+ is basically a given, but 100M is becoming harder every day. My original prediction was based on the PS1/PS2 sales pattern, where both sold around 1/3 of their lifetime sales after the successor is out. With that math, PS3 would do 105M.
However, I'm starting to think that actually PS consoles sell 1/3 of their sales after the 5th year. PS4 launched on the 7th year of the PS3. If that's the case, PS3 would end up with 96M.
Recent ActivityView more
This list only shows a selection of games from this user's favourite games.View all games
Recent Forum PostsView more
thismeintiel said: If distracting frame rate drops aren't part of a score, even if fans say you can barely notice them (which means for the average gamer, it will be noticeable), then I guess games shouldn't be rated on any technical aspects at all. Shitty graphics? Who cares. Bugs galore? Who cares. Input lag? Phh. I had fun with the game, so I'm giving it a perfect (or damn near it)...
Panama said: If i recall correctly, the last guardian was lambasted for its technical performance by a lot of critics. Irony here is it runs no worse than a docked switch running BotW It still got good scores (it's an 82, come on). The points it lost weren't due to framerate issues. It was because it had outdated camera mechanics and some outdated paradigms. Its long development...
Reviewers don't care that much about framerate. Gamers also don't give a damn, 95% of them don't have idea of the framerate their game is running. People play games and have fun, that's it. Ocarina of Time, Shadow of the Colossus, all those ran badly. But they are great games regardless of framerate. A mediocre game at 144 fps still is just a mediocre game that nobody will remember after 1 or...
Favourite Games: God of War, Sonic, Super Smash Bros, Gran Turismo, Twisted Metal
Favourite Music: Judas Priest, Metallica, Slipknot, Motörhead...