Ryusuken on 30 November 2009
| jarrod said: Launch aligned comparisons are inherently disingenuous for competitive platforms. You really just can't divorce a platform's performance from the context of what was happening in the market and industry when that actually happened. Launch aligned N64 also slaughtered PS1 it's first 3 years, yet that didn't mean much in the end. A 360 launching in Q4 2006 would've had an HD-DVD drive, upspecced chips, more RAM and launch games like Gears of War, Dead Rising, Saints Row, Oblivion and Blue Dragon. A PS3 launching in Q4 2006 would've had a DVD drive, no RSX (it'd have used a repurposed low-SPU CELL instead, as was the original plan), probably less RAM and launch games like Ridge Racer 6, COD2, Gun, THAW and (maybe) Genji (1). |
Supositions. NO one is sure/can be sure of how the specs whould be different (for a fact MS wasnt into the HD format wars, it was more trying to offer somethingthey knew Sony had on PS3 and X360 didnt - it even gone BD as soon as the war was over) and the rest is just that as well. Thats the only problem with launch aligned numbers IMO, the what if what nots it comes with, so that aside, I think its a valid point, if done in way to really compare how things gone at each period of time. You'll have to put market enviroment there, how the trends where at the time and so on, and that why I try to not use it, its too troublesome to do it right, and I am lazy as hell to do such things.
