ironman said:
Spankey said: hmm... an interesting thought just occurred to me. I've spent roughly double so far on games for my PS3 than I paid for the console. If I'd have bought a 360 instead and bought roughly the same amount on games, I'd have spent almost 4 times as much on games as I did on the console.
weird.
anyway, OT, PS3 falling bad? So you mean it falls in being bad? i.e. doing well? in that case, I agree with you.
|
Thats because the 360 actually has good games that are worth the money! LMAO BTW how does the PS3 "fall" in being bad? And how is it doing well?
|
lolol!
but @ underlined, it's like if something sucks terribly, it's a double negative which actually when you break it down means that it's terrible at sucking, which means it actually rocks.
Pedantic I know, but worth a mention I thought.
As for it doing well, it's still selling games and hardware. if it wasn't selling either of those, it would be doing badly. IMO