steven787 said:
It has to do with Wii because what IGN calls evolution and next-gen is what the Wii already does. The article tries to spin the reasons why the PS3 and Xbox 360 "lost" the console war into an article about why it's a good thing that Sony and MS have lost so much money this gen, that they have to sell upgrades, "safe games," and delaying titles and can't afford to make new consoles or risky-creative games. Edit: Besides, the article mentions Wii several times. |
That wasn't what the article was saying but if the Wii is already doing this stuff than why should we go onto the next gen? What you said supports the IGN article really. You guys really seem to be looking for Wii bashing when it's not there. This is an article about why 360 and PS3 should stay around longer than the typical 5-6 years. If the article is so stupid why isn't anyone here actually proving their points wrong? The article has very little to do with Wii yet you all seem to think it does. Why is that?
