BMaker11 said:
Article was written when the author spoke of Dead Rising, Halo 3, Gears of War, and a 40GB PS3. I'll take the assumption that this is from 2007 or early 2008. So in the frame of reference from when the article was written, 30% is correct. Banning me because of that would then lead me to question the moderating staff. If people can get banned for facts, then what next? |
You know, I could also bring up an article about how every Playstation failed due to bad lasers on their initial run(s) and leave out pertienent facts such as that I'm talking about the PS1, or the fact that later models were fixed.
You and I both know that the early 360's were often cited at having a 30% failure rate. That does not mean that every Xbox 360 made since the article has that failure rate. Falcons and Jaspers fixed the problem. Since you seem to know the Xbox 360 well (as you post on the Microsoft forums quite often), you should know that failure rates have dropped significantly since the introduction of said models.
Not only this, when we're comparing the $199.99 and other price points, we must note that we're comparing current hardware revisions. The Xbox 360's with the 30% failure rate did not cost $199.99 for the Arcade. They costed $299.99. While your at it, why not compare the price of a 60GB PS3 to a 20GB 360 premium from 2006 at $399.99? Afterall, your only going to get those failure rates with those consoles.
You should *really* know better than to cite old articles spouting even older sales information.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
