SHMUPGurus said:
Bboid said:
pika said:
Microsoft enter the videogame market with one purpose: don't let Sony to take their computer business with his Trojan Horse.
Back those days, Playstation brand was at top and Microsoft fear them as hell.... but now, Playstation means almost nothing and although Nintendo is again #1, they seem to don't care, because they only want to make games.
Do you think the Xbox did his mission or needs to do something else, like control the market?
|
It's funny you posted this picture because Microsoft has performed similarly to the United States military performance in Iraq. The short-term goal of the Xbox 360 was to penetrate the market and become a leader of HD console gaming. They did this at a cost though. They produced a horribly flawed unit (i love my unit but you can not argue against this) as a vehicle to achieve this goal (xbox 1 being the gulf war 1) and though the unit was successful in market penetration, they will be spending/have spent years correcting the issues. This almost directly compares to Iraq where we entered, stormed, won and after the fact spent years/are spending years solving the insurgency issue/infrastructure issues caused by an insufficient military presence at the initial invasion to control groups and underground insurgency.
Ironic huh?
|
It's the American way of life, I presume?
But seriously, there was a winner in the Iraq war? As far as I know, it's not over yet.
|
America is a collage of the world so it is the way of worldly nature. As for a "winner" in Iraq I am referring to the announcement of the end of major combat missions; Mission Accomplished. But as you said is there a real winner? Ask that about the console war as well. The only thing both have accomplished is creating a divide in the people. I don't want to go any deeper into the whole Iraq conflict as there are strongly conflicting opinions on the matter that can ruin this thread in a snap. I just wanted to point out the wierdly coinciding values to the 360, the war and that photo.
