Quantcast
Switch is selling better than PS4, PS2, PS1, PS3, X360 launch aligned

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Switch is selling better than PS4, PS2, PS1, PS3, X360 launch aligned

ArchangelMadzz said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Actually your point is wrong. Had your point simply been "oh, the Switch hasn't been out for two years", you would have been correct. But that was just a supporting point you were making. What you were actually trying to get across with your comparison was that the PS4 got it's first official price cut when it had been out for two years, and that the Switch has not even been out for two years, so Mandalore's comparison is flawed because you can't say that the Switch is still selling at it's original price as a supporting point for the console when it hasn't even been out as long as the PS4 was when it got it's first price cut.

But this isn't correct. The Switch has already gone on longer than the PS4 did when it got it's first price cut. Unless you were making a different objection with the 2nd half of your comment to Mandalore's, what that objection could be I can't figure out in the slightest. At this point you should agree with Mandalore's overall point, the only thing he really got wrong was saying that the PS4 up to this point had two official price cuts, but that was only half of your reply.

Hope you get what I mean. 

Seeing as we're nitpicking, you'd have a point if this chart was for the first 23 months. But it's for the fist 22 months. Both consoles hadn't had an official price cut within 22 months of launch.

What you just said wasn't a nitpick though? It's just moving goalposts. Mandalore said the Switch is still selling. Even if Mandalore was only talking about the chart, you are very clearly talking about now. You would have stated otherwise had that been the case, and you yourself even compared the point the Switch is at now in it's life to the point the PS4 was at on it's 24th month (though that comparison was wrong), so that was clearly never the set frame of time.

I only replied to you because you asked me what it was that you said that wasn't correct. You didn't seem to get my point, so I reiterated. No need to take it that way, man. 



STRAIGHT TO DAMNATION?YOU'RE THE TERRORIST HERE!

 

 

Around the Network
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
ArchangelMadzz said:

Seeing as we're nitpicking, you'd have a point if this chart was for the first 23 months. But it's for the fist 22 months. Both consoles hadn't had an official price cut within 22 months of launch.

What you just said wasn't a nitpick though? It's just moving goalposts. Mandalore said the Switch is still selling. Even if Mandalore was only talking about the chart, you are very clearly talking about now. You would have stated otherwise had that been the case, and you yourself even compared the point the Switch is at now in it's life to the point the PS4 was at on it's 24th month (though that comparison was wrong), so that was clearly never the set frame of time.

I only replied to you because you asked me what it was that you said that wasn't correct. You didn't seem to get my point, so I reiterated. No need to take it that way, man. 

And he's right, it is still selling, but we don't know the figures for January, December is what we have and is recent enough, but that's the data we're talking about.

I just think it's pretty clear that my original point was obviously to say that PS4 hasn't had 2 official price cutxs, it took 2 years for it to get it's first and switch isn't even at the point of selling for 2 years. Which is why I accused you of nitpicking for doing a (paraphrasing) 'well actually, it got it's price cut a few weeks before it's 2nd birthday' Which still doesn't change the point because we can't even compare the switch to that as those numbers aren't even out for it's 23rd month.

The point seemed like such a miniscule point to make when it's very clear what my original comment was stating that the post I was replying to was pretty ridiculous, so I felt like this entire exchange was unnecessary, apologies for getting frustrated. 



ArchangelMadzz said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

What you just said wasn't a nitpick though? It's just moving goalposts. Mandalore said the Switch is still selling. Even if Mandalore was only talking about the chart, you are very clearly talking about now. You would have stated otherwise had that been the case, and you yourself even compared the point the Switch is at now in it's life to the point the PS4 was at on it's 24th month (though that comparison was wrong), so that was clearly never the set frame of time.

I only replied to you because you asked me what it was that you said that wasn't correct. You didn't seem to get my point, so I reiterated. No need to take it that way, man. 

And he's right, it is still selling, but we don't know the figures for January, December is what we have and is recent enough, but that's the data we're talking about.

I just think it's pretty clear that my original point was obviously to say that PS4 hasn't had 2 official price cutxs, it took 2 years for it to get it's first and switch isn't even at the point of selling for 2 years. Which is why I accused you of nitpicking for doing a (paraphrasing) 'well actually, it got it's price cut a few weeks before it's 2nd birthday' Which still doesn't change the point because we can't even compare the switch to that as those numbers aren't even out for it's 23rd month.

The point seemed like such a miniscule point to make when it's very clear what my original comment was stating that the post I was replying to was pretty ridiculous, so I felt like this entire exchange was unnecessary, apologies for getting frustrated. 

I understand where you're coming from but ... the first part of your comment is literally just a question (which is really a correction). It isn't your overall "point". The only argument you really put forth and gave to Mandalore was the last part of your comment. The first part of it is just a question, or really more of a correction, because he made a mistake. It isn't the meat and potatoes of what you were saying. I don't even feel like that should be argued. And since I was only replying to you, it's a bit disingenuous to suddenly only care about the set time frame in the OP. My entire condition for replying was on the comparison to the 24th month. 

If you want to call that nitpicking, then just be aware you did the same exact thing to Mandalore. The only part of your reply that was correct was a nitpick of the fact that he was technically wrong on the amount of price cuts the system had. And now you're saying that was your main point. So if your main point was just to correct him on a number ... is that not a nitpick? I was at least addressing an actual argument being put forward. Mandalore's argument relies on the PS4 having a price cut, but not so much on the amount of cuts the PS4 had. That's really tangential to his overall point. On the other hand, what I replied to was very obviously the main point of your comment, and I don't know how it could be claimed otherwise. Again, the first half of your comment wasn't an argument it was just a factual correction, the second part of it is the only part where you're actually making a point to be argued for. 

I just feel like I needed to state all of this because I don't want to end the discussion on a summary that I take issue with. But, I don't think it needs to be argued anymore. No need in getting frustrated over this. Cheers.  



STRAIGHT TO DAMNATION?YOU'RE THE TERRORIST HERE!

 

 

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
ArchangelMadzz said:

And he's right, it is still selling, but we don't know the figures for January, December is what we have and is recent enough, but that's the data we're talking about.

I just think it's pretty clear that my original point was obviously to say that PS4 hasn't had 2 official price cutxs, it took 2 years for it to get it's first and switch isn't even at the point of selling for 2 years. Which is why I accused you of nitpicking for doing a (paraphrasing) 'well actually, it got it's price cut a few weeks before it's 2nd birthday' Which still doesn't change the point because we can't even compare the switch to that as those numbers aren't even out for it's 23rd month.

The point seemed like such a miniscule point to make when it's very clear what my original comment was stating that the post I was replying to was pretty ridiculous, so I felt like this entire exchange was unnecessary, apologies for getting frustrated. 

I understand where you're coming from but ... the first part of your comment is literally just a question (which is really a correction). It isn't your overall "point". The only argument you really put forth and gave to Mandalore was the last part of your comment. The first part of it is just a question, or really more of a correction, because he made a mistake. It isn't the meat and potatoes of what you were saying. I don't even feel like that should be argued. And since I was only replying to you, it's a bit disingenuous to suddenly only care about the set time frame in the OP. My entire condition for replying was on the comparison to the 24th month. 

If you want to call that nitpicking, then just be aware you did the same exact thing to Mandalore. The only part of your reply that was correct was a nitpick of the fact that he was technically wrong on the amount of price cuts the system had. And now you're saying that was your main point. So if your main point was just to correct him on a number ... is that not a nitpick? I was at least addressing an actual argument being put forward. Mandalore's argument relies on the PS4 having a price cut, but not so much on the amount of cuts the PS4 had. That's really tangential to his overall point. On the other hand, what I replied to was very obviously the main point of your comment, and I don't know how it could be claimed otherwise. Again, the first half of your comment wasn't an argument it was just a factual correction, the second part of it is the only part where you're actually making a point to be argued for. 

I just feel like I needed to state all of this because I don't want to end the discussion on a summary that I take issue with. But, I don't think it needs to be argued anymore. No need in getting frustrated over this. Cheers.  

It's not a nitpick for someone to claim that it's close between the Switch and PS4 because it's had 2 official price cuts when on the graph there are 0 price cuts. How is that nitpicking? 

I'll break down my comment. My comment was "2 Official price cuts? Where did you get that from?


PS4's first official price cut was on the 9th October 2015. 2 years after launch. The switch hasn't even been out for 2 years."

1. I asked him where he got that figure from that is incorrect. Factual
2. I said the date PS4 got it's first official price cut. Factual.
4. I said the switch hasn't been out for 2 years. Factual
3. I said it was 2 years after launch. It was 23 months. But it's quite obvious why I said 2 years. I'm not gonna say it was 693 days, or whatever. That's the part you have an objection with that's the only factually 'incorrect' thing that I said. I should've just said 'approximately'. The graph this entire thread is based on doesn't even show the switch against a pricecut because in the launch alligned graphs that hasn't even happened yet. That's why I said you're nitpicking. 

Him saying that the PS4 has had 2 official price cuts in 23 months is ridiculously incorrect and I have no idea how anyone could say that pointing out that that's wrong on every level is nitpicking. 

This is one of the most pointless interactions I've had on this site. 



ArchangelMadzz said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

I understand where you're coming from but ... the first part of your comment is literally just a question (which is really a correction). It isn't your overall "point". The only argument you really put forth and gave to Mandalore was the last part of your comment. The first part of it is just a question, or really more of a correction, because he made a mistake. It isn't the meat and potatoes of what you were saying. I don't even feel like that should be argued. And since I was only replying to you, it's a bit disingenuous to suddenly only care about the set time frame in the OP. My entire condition for replying was on the comparison to the 24th month. 

If you want to call that nitpicking, then just be aware you did the same exact thing to Mandalore. The only part of your reply that was correct was a nitpick of the fact that he was technically wrong on the amount of price cuts the system had. And now you're saying that was your main point. So if your main point was just to correct him on a number ... is that not a nitpick? I was at least addressing an actual argument being put forward. Mandalore's argument relies on the PS4 having a price cut, but not so much on the amount of cuts the PS4 had. That's really tangential to his overall point. On the other hand, what I replied to was very obviously the main point of your comment, and I don't know how it could be claimed otherwise. Again, the first half of your comment wasn't an argument it was just a factual correction, the second part of it is the only part where you're actually making a point to be argued for. 

I just feel like I needed to state all of this because I don't want to end the discussion on a summary that I take issue with. But, I don't think it needs to be argued anymore. No need in getting frustrated over this. Cheers.  

It's not a nitpick for someone to claim that it's close between the Switch and PS4 because it's had 2 official price cuts when on the graph there are 0 price cuts. How is that nitpicking? 

I'll break down my comment. My comment was "2 Official price cuts? Where did you get that from?


PS4's first official price cut was on the 9th October 2015. 2 years after launch. The switch hasn't even been out for 2 years."

1. I asked him where he got that figure from that is incorrect. Factual
2. I said the date PS4 got it's first official price cut. Factual.
4. I said the switch hasn't been out for 2 years. Factual
3. I said it was 2 years after launch. It was 23 months. But it's quite obvious why I said 2 years. I'm not gonna say it was 693 days, or whatever. That's the part you have an objection with that's the only factually 'incorrect' thing that I said. I should've just said 'approximately'. The graph this entire thread is based on doesn't even show the switch against a pricecut because in the launch alligned graphs that hasn't even happened yet. That's why I said you're nitpicking. 

Him saying that the PS4 has had 2 official price cuts in 23 months is ridiculously incorrect and I have no idea how anyone could say that pointing out that that's wrong on every level is nitpicking. 

It seems like at this point you just can't admit you were wrong ... I mean, we have been over this. We weren't talking about the graph. You made a comparison of 24 months. And I already went over in my first or second reply why it was ridiculous for you to say two years. It wasn't due to the fact that I was just being a fact nazi. I don't expect you to say the precise amount of days. The reason why it was ridiculous was because you made a comment about how the Switch hadn't even been out for two years, when in fact it has already been closer to it's 2nd year anniversary than the PS4 was when it got a price cut. Making your entire point invalid. 

Half of his comment was a factually incorrect statement, the other half was his argument. You corrected the factually inaccurate part, but made an inaccurate counter-argument when you were arguing against the 2nd part of his comment. I only argued against half of your comment, but I was at least arguing against a point you were making, not the factual correction. If you're going to say I'm nitpicking when I'm literally replying to an argument you're making ... then I don't think you're using that term correctly. If your entire point wasn't centered on which system has gone on the longest without a price cut, you'd be correct that it was a nitpick. Unfortunately, the part I replied to WAS about that. 

You are starting to twist the discussion into a post-factual one. You basically already admitted I was right earlier when you said that you didn't have any grievances with what I was saying, except that it was a minuscule point that I was focusing too much on. So what is it? Was it a wrong point, or a correct one that just frustrated you because it focused on something "minuscule"? And let me just say again, it wasn't a minuscule point. It was literally the only argument you brought up against Mandalore. Correcting someone isn't an argument in and of itself in that context. Mandalore's comment would have been better had he not said there was two price cuts, but his point still stands even when corrected. It's a little bit more ridiculous, sure, but that's it. Whereas the entire argument you brought up against him crumbles under the correction that the Switch has already gone on longer than the PS4 did with a price cut.

And this is just getting a tad ridiculous. No matter how much you shift discussion to the graph, it doesn't change what you said. I only replied to what you said, that's it. No matter how minuscule it was to you or no matter how much it doesn't relate to the graph, you aren't giving a valid argument against my reply to something you said. You are just shifting focus. If it didn't relate to the OP well .. maybe don't say it in the first place then? There's nothing wrong with having an incorrect counter-argument, we've all made them. But defending it on and on isn't doing any favors. 

Peace  

Last edited by AngryLittleAlchemist - 6 days ago

STRAIGHT TO DAMNATION?YOU'RE THE TERRORIST HERE!

 

 

Around the Network
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
ArchangelMadzz said:

It's not a nitpick for someone to claim that it's close between the Switch and PS4 because it's had 2 official price cuts when on the graph there are 0 price cuts. How is that nitpicking? 

I'll break down my comment. My comment was "2 Official price cuts? Where did you get that from?


PS4's first official price cut was on the 9th October 2015. 2 years after launch. The switch hasn't even been out for 2 years."

1. I asked him where he got that figure from that is incorrect. Factual
2. I said the date PS4 got it's first official price cut. Factual.
4. I said the switch hasn't been out for 2 years. Factual
3. I said it was 2 years after launch. It was 23 months. But it's quite obvious why I said 2 years. I'm not gonna say it was 693 days, or whatever. That's the part you have an objection with that's the only factually 'incorrect' thing that I said. I should've just said 'approximately'. The graph this entire thread is based on doesn't even show the switch against a pricecut because in the launch alligned graphs that hasn't even happened yet. That's why I said you're nitpicking. 

Him saying that the PS4 has had 2 official price cuts in 23 months is ridiculously incorrect and I have no idea how anyone could say that pointing out that that's wrong on every level is nitpicking. 

It seems like at this point you just can't admit you were wrong ... I mean, we have been over this. We weren't talking about the graph. You made a comparison of 24 months. And I already went over in my first or second reply why it was ridiculous for you to say two years. It wasn't due to the fact that I was just being a fact nazi. I don't expect you to say the precise amount of days. The reason why it was ridiculous was because you made a comment about how the Switch hadn't even been out for two years, when in fact it has already been closer to it's 2nd year anniversary than the PS4 was when it got a price cut. Making your entire point invalid. 

Half of his comment was a factually incorrect statement, the other half was his argument. You corrected the factually inaccurate part, but made an inaccurate counter-argument when you were arguing against the 2nd part of his comment. I only argued against half of your comment, but I was at least arguing against a point you were making, not the factual correction. If you're going to say I'm nitpicking when I'm literally replying to an argument you're making ... then I don't think you're using that term correctly. If your entire point wasn't centered on which system has gone on the longest without a price cut, you'd be correct that it was a nitpick. Unfortunately, the part I replied to WAS about that. 

You are starting to twist the discussion into a post-factual one. You basically already admitted I was right earlier when you said that you didn't have any grievances with what I was saying, except that it was a minuscule point that I was focusing too much on. So what is it? Was it a wrong point, or a correct one that just frustrated you because it focused on something "minuscule"? And let me just say again, it wasn't a minuscule point. It was literally the only argument you brought up against Mandalore. Correcting someone isn't an argument in and of itself in that context. Mandalore's comment would have been better had he not said there was two price cuts, but his point still stands even when corrected. It's a little bit more ridiculous, sure, but that's it. Whereas the entire argument you brought up against him crumbles under the correction that the Switch has already gone on longer than the PS4 did with a price cut.

And this is just getting a tad ridiculous. No matter how much you shift discussion to the graph, it doesn't change what you said. I only replied to what you said, that's it. No matter how minuscule it was to you or no matter how much it doesn't relate to the graph, you aren't giving a valid argument against my reply to something you said. You are just shifting focus. If it didn't relate to the OP well .. maybe don't say it in the first place then? There's nothing wrong with having an incorrect counter-argument, we've all made them. But defending it on and on isn't doing any favors. 

Peace  

Sorry to but in. But I find it very hard to believe it was a harmless and unintenional mistake on "PS4 had 2 pricecuts and Switch not".

It seemed much more like he was trying to downplay the sales of PS4 in comparison. Both are selling at a similar pace and without pricecuts on the period shown. Anyway Switch may get a pricecut in the near future or possibly lose a little the pace compared to PS4.



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


DonFerrari said:

Sorry to but in. But I find it very hard to believe it was a harmless and unintenional mistake on "PS4 had 2 pricecuts and Switch not".

It seemed much more like he was trying to downplay the sales of PS4 in comparison. Both are selling at a similar pace and without pricecuts on the period shown. Anyway Switch may get a pricecut in the near future or possibly lose a little the pace compared to PS4.

That's certainly possible. Not going to defend Mandalore, I have no idea if there was some further malicious implication. I only kept referencing him because he was the user the original reply from Archangel was to. I probably shouldn't do that because it puts too much of a reliance on what Mandalore does or didn't mean, and I don't really care, lol, hence I didn't reply to him but to the other user. But if that's what Mandalore was doing then that's not good, lol. However I can see where he's coming from, I often get confused between temporary price cuts and permanent price cuts when I look at old news articles. 

You're right though that to an extent he was making a point against the PS4 in the comparison. I don't think that can be denied. Whether or not it was meant to be malicious, I don't know. 

I think a much better argument is the one which you yourself state. They're selling very similarly. The PS4 was also pricier at launch, which should be expected given the fact that it was a high-tech home console. But still. It was selling at a higher price than the Switch was even with a price cut, which should be noted. Also, the fact that they launched at completely different months means these graphs are almost meaningless. They will keep swinging one direction every time a holiday comes up. 



STRAIGHT TO DAMNATION?YOU'RE THE TERRORIST HERE!

 

 

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
DonFerrari said:

Sorry to but in. But I find it very hard to believe it was a harmless and unintenional mistake on "PS4 had 2 pricecuts and Switch not".

It seemed much more like he was trying to downplay the sales of PS4 in comparison. Both are selling at a similar pace and without pricecuts on the period shown. Anyway Switch may get a pricecut in the near future or possibly lose a little the pace compared to PS4.

That's certainly possible. Not going to defend Mandalore, I have no idea if there was some further malicious implication. I only kept referencing him because he was the user the original reply from Archangel was to. I probably shouldn't do that because it puts too much of a reliance on what Mandalore does or didn't mean, and I don't really care, lol, hence I didn't reply to him but to the other user. But if that's what Mandalore was doing then that's not good, lol. However I can see where he's coming from, I often get confused between temporary price cuts and permanent price cuts when I look at old news articles. 

You're right though that to an extent he was making a point against the PS4 in the comparison. I don't think that can be denied. Whether or not it was meant to be malicious, I don't know. 

I think a much better argument is the one which you yourself state. They're selling very similarly. The PS4 was also pricier at launch, which should be expected given the fact that it was a high-tech home console. But still. It was selling at a higher price than the Switch was even with a price cut, which should be noted. Also, the fact that they launched at completely different months means these graphs are almost meaningless. They will keep swinging one direction every time a holiday comes up. 

Long term it could mean that PS4 would have more space for further pricecuts, but since Sony have been holding the price on 299 (I believe we have had 2 official pricecuts of 50 right?) that argument of pricecut could become a burden for switch in the future considering that after the total of 100 USD pricecut it gone to sell like 18-20-18M and that is quite hard to achieve.

But while both trade the lead aligned this will remain interesting to see, and I think it may take possibly 24M for PS4 to not be passed again by Switch (I firmly believe Switch will end 80-100M Total).



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


Can't we just be happy that Sony and Nintendo are currently killing it, and that Microsoft is doing ok? No one is bombing currently!



DonFerrari said:

Long term it could mean that PS4 would have more space for further pricecuts, but since Sony have been holding the price on 299 (I believe we have had 2 official pricecuts of 50 right?) that argument of pricecut could become a burden for switch in the future considering that after the total of 100 USD pricecut it gone to sell like 18-20-18M and that is quite hard to achieve.

But while both trade the lead aligned this will remain interesting to see, and I think it may take possibly 24M for PS4 to not be passed again by Switch (I firmly believe Switch will end 80-100M Total).

OOF. Now you're basically asking me to give a lifetime prediction xD 

Well ... errhmmm .... 

I can't give one! I keep going back in forth in my head. If they release a Switch lite this year, then I think it should be pretty easy to predict where the console goes in terms of lifetime sales after this fiscal year is over. 

Last edited by AngryLittleAlchemist - 5 days ago

STRAIGHT TO DAMNATION?YOU'RE THE TERRORIST HERE!