| EdGuila said: Sony is in last place but will be caught up in March 2009. PS3 sales as of July 2008 equal was the 360 has sold as of the December 2007. Yeah half a year behind despite the 360 getting a one year head start. If despite this you feel that the 360 (being $150 less, releasing a year earlier, bribing developers and still coming in last) is sucess, please, hook me up with whatever you're smoking.
P.S. I can tell by your use of insults against people play the opposing system that you are very stressed that the system you play is a slowly sinking ship, but don't get mad at me, it's only the truth, I wish MS was doing better than they are but little about the world is fair. I'm sorry, just the way things are. |
How does this change anything? I think this is more missing the point.
It doesn't matter if Sony will get 2nd. They are in last now. They are in last when they are saying their competition's console only lasted 4 to 5 years. This is coming from a company that lost money on every console sold. From the guys that have had no profitability and no big hits. At least Microsoft has something with Halo.
The point was that Sony shouldn't be saying anything about a 10 yrs life cycle now. Their system eats any money the others make and is becoming a lyability. If Sony was in good shape then they'd be justified. But being in third, taking major loses, and a unsure future, they are in no way to talk about 10 yrs life cycles. It makes them look like a fool.
