I agree, yet disagree.
I agree that no one game can truely move a massive amount of units, and cause a game buying public to attach to a system for a sole game. If this were the case, PCE would of sold far better, and so would of the N64 and Saturn.
However, there's an inherant fact that every game is a system seller - regardless if it drives 50 people to buy a system, 500, or 5000. Collectively, 10 to 20 games move hundreds of thousands of systems.
For systems such as the X360 and PS3, I agree that it's very hard for people to attach themselves to those systems for one game, due to price. However, one game (such as EBG, H3, GTAIV, or such) can make consumers take the plunge, if they preceve a good value in their purchase if they are planning on buying other games as well.
IE, Joe consumer buys a X360 during Halo week. He buys it because Halo 3 is out, but he also wants to buy Mass Effect soon, is buying Bioshock, and is also buying Eternal Sonata and an old preowned copy of Crackdown. Which game drove his purchase? Halo3, but the water is very murky: had Bioshock and ES not been there, the purchase might be far more hesitant.
So I do believe that there are games that become "system sellers" because there's enough software around that one major game to justify a purchase - when Zelda:OoT came out, sales for the N64 were at rock bottom, and OoT provided one of the largest boosts the N64 ever had in it's entire US lifespan (I think it moved about 500,000 hardware units out of normal for the month). Were sales of Zelda:OoT the only game that was effected? No. The consumers precieved a strong value purchase because Starfox 64, Goldeneye, SM64, and Banjo & Kazooie also were there as a strong purchase for a system.
This is why, imo, we're seeing increases in sales for the PS3 month over month (since June), and the X360 in Japan year over year: there are enough titles to start garnering more purchases, despite the PS3 being expensive, and the X360 having a negative image from J-gamers.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
