What metric of success do you use for all the current generation consoles?

[aderoche]

Slimebeast said:

aderoche said:

Slimebeast said:

aderoche said:

Success needs to be measured against the manufacturer's goals. Did they achieve what they set out to achieve?

 

 No. It's only one factor and not the biggest one.

Would you honestly think Xbox was more successful than the PS2, just because you were told that MS had a goal of selling say 15 million units?

 

If someone sets out to achieve a goal and succeeds then I would say they where successful. Of course succeeding at a trivial goal carries very little merrit. There isn't alot of middle ground in public perception, that which does not succeed has failed. Was the xbox a failure? could it have done better?

 

Quit dodging.

If I set a goal to run 100 meters under 13 seconds, and I manage to do it, I'm more successful than Usain Bolt if he fails to set a new world record in the next Olympics?

 

 

To directly answer your questions. The xbox was not as successful as the ps2 at selling systems, or software, just as you are not as successful at running 100 meters as Usain Bolt. This does not mean that the xbox was not successful in it's own right. You are talking about success at a shared criteria that allows companies to be measured agaist one another. This allows for simple judgements of who is the most successful.

The reason I did not want to directly answer you question was because you framed it as success of one console verses another, which requires shared criteria, and is therfore at a tangent to my point which was that the criteria for success depends upon what the manufacturer set out to achieve.