By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
astrosmash said:
VBI said:


For one, that's assuming that the 360 releasing against a then dominant PS2 was a good idea. It didn't have "no competition" for a year as suggested.

 

I think you are misunderstanding what the one year advantage really is. Almost every new console, including all three that are out right now, suffer a real drought between their lauch and sometime after their first anniversary. The 360 reached the end of this drought period at about the same time the other two were launching; they had huge droughts just when the 360 lineup was getting good - this was a huge deal in 2007 (the much better 360 lineup that year probably contributed to the low ps3 sales) .

 

 

 

 The sales didn't take place in a vacuum. It was still out at a time when the PS2 was the must have console, it's not comparable in "next gen" terms, but in literal "people going to the game store to buy stuff" terms, a lot of people were (and indeed still are) buying PS2s instead of any other console available, largely because that's what everyone else has/had. And again, while what you said here is valid, it means that the 360 with the standard launch selection was sitting on shelves in the same stores as the cheaper PS2 with a massive proven game library. The PS2 is a mammoth freak of a console, and even today thousands are still buying them every week. Every game store I go to still has massive PS2 shelf space, and all the new consoles are still technically competing against that.



Will you teach me to football?