Bodhesatva said:
Ugh, the old "face it, it's true" routine. It's always a giant, red flag indicating that the person doesn't actually have any evidence, but they want to overpower your argument with sheer force of will. "It's just true, too bad!" Do you have any evidence to support your assertion? Because again, the only evidence we do have is that the Wii sells to wealthier families than the PS3 or 360 do. That certainly doesn't fit in to your "functionality = more money" equation. If it's not true for the Wii, why would it be so for the 360? I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, mind you, just that the basis of your assertion most definitely is. You'll have to do better than "it's just the truth." |
Well, how about this for two facts. The average age of a PS3 owner is older then the average age of a 360 owner.
As age goes up, people make more money (why the Wii has a higher average income, it has a lot of older owners).
So aside from anything related to the console itself, these two facts should account for it.
Now, the question is why is the average age of a PS3 owner higher? I feel it's due to the comments in my last post.
