Killergran said:
This here is analysis and explanations of the data. It's also clear that it is an analysis that is set on defending or explaining the difference between PS3 software and xbox software sales. That's all fine by me. But it does not render the original data (which is not mine, nor is it Pineapple's) useless or meaningless. It was not presented as a "Xbox is better than PS3" piece, merely as raw data to be looked upon. And it IS interesting in that respect, mostly because gathering that data for oneself is a hideous task. If you thought the analysis was lacking it was because there WAS no analysis. There was just the complete data of how much each company had sold on each console. I find it to be interesting, and you find it useless because there was no analysis with it. But without the data, there can be no analysis. It's sort of like saying that showing the numbers of how much the consoles have sold each week and in total is meaningless because it doesn't take into account how long they have been on the market, what pricepoint they are at, what is included in the bundles, what games are available etc. Raw data is just that, and it is what you make of it that is interesting. As we did in this thread. Investigate, explain, analyse. I, at least, couldn't have done it without the totals numbers Pineapple put up. This particular set is particulary good for seeing how well each company are doing on each platform, relative to each other. If you want to construct a set that is good at determening how well PS3 games are holding up against Xbox 360 games, I would be very interested in seeing your analysis and data. Perhaps 2008-2009, adjusted for differences in platform size and excluding exclusives would be a good place to start. |
That's exactly what I said in my second post. I said thanks for the information it was interesting to note but that it was useless. So you found it interesting, I found it interesting, and then I added that it was useless data that can't be used to analyze. You then tried to defend it that it was not useless and can be used to draw meaningful conclusions and I proceeded to try to discount anything meaningful from this data. The only data that I said was meaningful(in my first post) was the last bit of data, that you are now trying to use in your last paragraph to show that there was meaningful data. You just back pedaled yourself into my first two posts.







